Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Matilda de Vesci, wife of Thomas de Muschamp (d. 1190)
348 views
Skip to first unread message
John P. Ravilious
Jan 22, 2012, 9:10:55 AM1/22/12
to
22 January, 2012
Hello All,
In January 2008 there was a thread discussing Matilda, wife of
Thomas de Muschamp of Wooler, Northumberland (d. 1190) and her
identification as a daughter of William de Vesci of Alnwick [1]. Of
particular note was the statement in the Testa de Nevill (c.
1242-1250) regarding the holdings of William de Vesci's grandson of
the same name that " Robert de Muschamp holds Chevelingham and Hibburn
by free marriage " [2]. The identification of Matilda as William de
Vesci's daughter was taken up elsewhere, but no direct contemporaneous
evidence was noted at the time of the prior thread.
This direct evidence has been found in the records published
Dodsworth and Dugdale in 1661 concerning Alnwick. The " Stemma
Eustachii filii Johannis, Fundatoris Abbatiae de Alnewike " provides
an account of the de Vesci family and certain of their descendants,
and gives the following concerning William de Vesci's descendants of
the de Vesci and Muschamp families:
" Iste Willielmus de Vescy senior duxit sororem domini Roberti de
Stutevill, domini de Cnarsburg, nomine Burgam; et genuit ex ea
Eustachium de Vescy, Matildam, et Ceceliam. Iste Eustachius de Vescy
duxit filiam regis Scotiae, Margeriam nomine ; et genuit ex ea
Willielmum de Vescy, patrem Johannis et Willielmi de Vescy, qui sine
haeredibus obierunt.
Matilda soror Eustachii de Vescy supradicti, data fuit Thomae de
Muscampo, qui genuit ex ea Robertum de Muscampo; de quo venit alius
Robertus de Muscampo; de quo Isabella, quae data fuit Willielmo de
Huntercumbe; de quo Eustachius de Huntercumbe." [3]
The pedigree can be dated to the early 14th century based on the
last individuals identified. There are questions that are raised by
the pedigree, including the possible existence of a younger Robert de
Muschamp not noted elsewhere (possibly a brother of the daughters and
eventual coheirs of Sir Robert de Muschamp, d. 1250) and the question
raised by Tate as to whether Burga de Stuteville was Matilda's mother
[4]. However, the record in the " Stemma Eustachii " provides a firm
basis on which to accept this filiation.
Cheers,
John
Eustace fitz = Beatrice Robert de = Hawise
John, d. 1157 I de Vesci Stuteville I
I ________I
I I
William de Vesci = Burga de
of Alnwick I Stuteville
d. 1183 I
______________________I____
I I
Eustace = Margaret Matilda = Thomas de
de Vesci I of Scotland de Vesci I Muschamps
d. 1216 I I d. 1190
______I _____________________I____________
I I I I I
William Sir Robert William Stephen Gilla
de Vesci de Muschamps = William
d. 1253 d. bef 24 Sept 1250 de Honum
= Isabel
_________I_______________
I I I
Cecily Marjorie Isabel
= Odinel = Malise = Walter de
de Ford Earl of Huntercomb
Strathearn d. 1271
d. bef 23 Nov 1271
Notes
[1] J. Ravilious et al., William de Vesci and the Muschamps of
Wooler, Northumberland, SGM, 15 Jan 2008.
[2] Translation given in George Tate, The History of the Borough,
Castle and Barony of Alnwick (Alnwick: Henry Hunter Blair, 1866), I:
74.
[3] Roger Dodsworth and William Dugdale, Monastici Anglicani Volumen
Alterum, de Canonicis Regularibus Augustinianis, cum Appendice
(London, 1661), pp. 592-3. A more modern edition of Monasticon
Anglicanum provides the same in vol. VI(part 2), p. 868, Num. IV.
[4] Tate, ibid. I:397.
Hello All,
In January 2008 there was a thread discussing Matilda, wife of
Thomas de Muschamp of Wooler, Northumberland (d. 1190) and her
identification as a daughter of William de Vesci of Alnwick [1]. Of
particular note was the statement in the Testa de Nevill (c.
1242-1250) regarding the holdings of William de Vesci's grandson of
the same name that " Robert de Muschamp holds Chevelingham and Hibburn
by free marriage " [2]. The identification of Matilda as William de
Vesci's daughter was taken up elsewhere, but no direct contemporaneous
evidence was noted at the time of the prior thread.
This direct evidence has been found in the records published
Dodsworth and Dugdale in 1661 concerning Alnwick. The " Stemma
Eustachii filii Johannis, Fundatoris Abbatiae de Alnewike " provides
an account of the de Vesci family and certain of their descendants,
and gives the following concerning William de Vesci's descendants of
the de Vesci and Muschamp families:
" Iste Willielmus de Vescy senior duxit sororem domini Roberti de
Stutevill, domini de Cnarsburg, nomine Burgam; et genuit ex ea
Eustachium de Vescy, Matildam, et Ceceliam. Iste Eustachius de Vescy
duxit filiam regis Scotiae, Margeriam nomine ; et genuit ex ea
Willielmum de Vescy, patrem Johannis et Willielmi de Vescy, qui sine
haeredibus obierunt.
Matilda soror Eustachii de Vescy supradicti, data fuit Thomae de
Muscampo, qui genuit ex ea Robertum de Muscampo; de quo venit alius
Robertus de Muscampo; de quo Isabella, quae data fuit Willielmo de
Huntercumbe; de quo Eustachius de Huntercumbe." [3]
The pedigree can be dated to the early 14th century based on the
last individuals identified. There are questions that are raised by
the pedigree, including the possible existence of a younger Robert de
Muschamp not noted elsewhere (possibly a brother of the daughters and
eventual coheirs of Sir Robert de Muschamp, d. 1250) and the question
raised by Tate as to whether Burga de Stuteville was Matilda's mother
[4]. However, the record in the " Stemma Eustachii " provides a firm
basis on which to accept this filiation.
Cheers,
John
Eustace fitz = Beatrice Robert de = Hawise
John, d. 1157 I de Vesci Stuteville I
I ________I
I I
William de Vesci = Burga de
of Alnwick I Stuteville
d. 1183 I
______________________I____
I I
Eustace = Margaret Matilda = Thomas de
de Vesci I of Scotland de Vesci I Muschamps
d. 1216 I I d. 1190
______I _____________________I____________
I I I I I
William Sir Robert William Stephen Gilla
de Vesci de Muschamps = William
d. 1253 d. bef 24 Sept 1250 de Honum
= Isabel
_________I_______________
I I I
Cecily Marjorie Isabel
= Odinel = Malise = Walter de
de Ford Earl of Huntercomb
Strathearn d. 1271
d. bef 23 Nov 1271
Notes
[1] J. Ravilious et al., William de Vesci and the Muschamps of
Wooler, Northumberland, SGM, 15 Jan 2008.
[2] Translation given in George Tate, The History of the Borough,
Castle and Barony of Alnwick (Alnwick: Henry Hunter Blair, 1866), I:
74.
[3] Roger Dodsworth and William Dugdale, Monastici Anglicani Volumen
Alterum, de Canonicis Regularibus Augustinianis, cum Appendice
(London, 1661), pp. 592-3. A more modern edition of Monasticon
Anglicanum provides the same in vol. VI(part 2), p. 868, Num. IV.
[4] Tate, ibid. I:397.
Alex Maxwell Findlater
Jan 22, 2012, 1:14:31 PM1/22/12
to
A couple of small additions to this:
Isabel coheiress of Sir Robert de Muschamps married secondly Ralph de
Greasley, having issue Agnes married Hugh FitzRalph ex quo Ralph
FitzHugh of Greasley (see below) (evidence drawn from Farrer's HKF)
[would the Sir Walter de Huntercombe who led so many of the homagings
in the Ragman Roll be the son of Isabel?]
Eustace de Vesci had a brother Warin, whose issue were the eventual
heirs (see below).
Thomas de Muschamps was the second husband (presumably) of their
sister Matilda, who married firstly Adam de Carlyle. The evidence is
the Ipm of William de Vesci of Kildare in 1316:
NORFOLK. Inq. 20 Oct. 9 Edw. II
William de Karliolo is the next heir of William de Vescy, and not
Gilbert de Aton nor John de Percy nor any other. For one William de
Vescy the stock (stipes), ancestor of the said William lately
deceased, had a son Eustace and a daughter Maud, and through Eustace
the right of his inheritance descended to William his son, to John his
son, and to William de Vescy, brother of the said John, who lately
died without heir of his body; whereupon the right of inheritance
reverted to the said Maud, sister of the said Eustace, who was married
to Adam de Karliolo, from whom it descended to Eudo de Karliolo her
son, to William his son, to William, the second, his son, and to
William de Karliolo, the third, his son and heir who now claims it.
The jury being demanded how they know this so openly, seeing that the
late William de Vescy had no lands &c. in Norfolk, say they know it
because William de Vescy, the stock, gave the manor of Saxlingham, co.
Norfolk, in free marriage to the abovesaid Adam de Karliolo with Maud
his daughter, to be held of himself and his heirs by service of ½
knight's fee, and also certain lands and tenements in Saxlyngham to be
similarly held by service of ¾ knight's fee, which Simon de Goseford
and Peter de Narford now hold of the said William de Karliolo. This
inquisition was delivered into the chancery at Lincoln, 12 Feb. 9 Edw.
II.
Endorsed. Returned at the suit of William de Karl [iolo].
There were two claimants, one Gilbert de Aton or Ayton, the other
William de Carliolo. Gilbert de Ayton was found as the heir, as his
descent was from a brother of Eustace de Vesci (d Aug 1216) rather
than a sister. The brother was Warin de Vesci of Knapton, whose
daughter Margery married Gilbert de Aton, had William, who had Gilbert
(dsp 1303) and William, whose son Sir Gilbert de Aton was the
successful claimant.
Ralph FitzHugh of Greasley & Musham m Joan d Ralph de la Haye
|
|
Hugh FitzRalph dsp 1261 and a sister and heiress
Eustacia m 1) Nicholas de Cauntelo
m 2) William de Ros of Ingmanthorpe (d 1310)
issue (per CP)
William de Cauntelo d 1308
|
|
William de Cauntelo, a minor in 1308
issue of second marriage (per CP)
Sir William de Ros, had Muskham (Notts) d 1310
|
|
Sir William de Ros, d by 1334
|
|
Sir Robert de Ros, with whom CP ends
Isabel coheiress of Sir Robert de Muschamps married secondly Ralph de
Greasley, having issue Agnes married Hugh FitzRalph ex quo Ralph
FitzHugh of Greasley (see below) (evidence drawn from Farrer's HKF)
[would the Sir Walter de Huntercombe who led so many of the homagings
in the Ragman Roll be the son of Isabel?]
Eustace de Vesci had a brother Warin, whose issue were the eventual
heirs (see below).
Thomas de Muschamps was the second husband (presumably) of their
sister Matilda, who married firstly Adam de Carlyle. The evidence is
the Ipm of William de Vesci of Kildare in 1316:
NORFOLK. Inq. 20 Oct. 9 Edw. II
William de Karliolo is the next heir of William de Vescy, and not
Gilbert de Aton nor John de Percy nor any other. For one William de
Vescy the stock (stipes), ancestor of the said William lately
deceased, had a son Eustace and a daughter Maud, and through Eustace
the right of his inheritance descended to William his son, to John his
son, and to William de Vescy, brother of the said John, who lately
died without heir of his body; whereupon the right of inheritance
reverted to the said Maud, sister of the said Eustace, who was married
to Adam de Karliolo, from whom it descended to Eudo de Karliolo her
son, to William his son, to William, the second, his son, and to
William de Karliolo, the third, his son and heir who now claims it.
The jury being demanded how they know this so openly, seeing that the
late William de Vescy had no lands &c. in Norfolk, say they know it
because William de Vescy, the stock, gave the manor of Saxlingham, co.
Norfolk, in free marriage to the abovesaid Adam de Karliolo with Maud
his daughter, to be held of himself and his heirs by service of ½
knight's fee, and also certain lands and tenements in Saxlyngham to be
similarly held by service of ¾ knight's fee, which Simon de Goseford
and Peter de Narford now hold of the said William de Karliolo. This
inquisition was delivered into the chancery at Lincoln, 12 Feb. 9 Edw.
II.
Endorsed. Returned at the suit of William de Karl [iolo].
There were two claimants, one Gilbert de Aton or Ayton, the other
William de Carliolo. Gilbert de Ayton was found as the heir, as his
descent was from a brother of Eustace de Vesci (d Aug 1216) rather
than a sister. The brother was Warin de Vesci of Knapton, whose
daughter Margery married Gilbert de Aton, had William, who had Gilbert
(dsp 1303) and William, whose son Sir Gilbert de Aton was the
successful claimant.
Ralph FitzHugh of Greasley & Musham m Joan d Ralph de la Haye
|
|
Hugh FitzRalph dsp 1261 and a sister and heiress
Eustacia m 1) Nicholas de Cauntelo
m 2) William de Ros of Ingmanthorpe (d 1310)
issue (per CP)
William de Cauntelo d 1308
|
|
William de Cauntelo, a minor in 1308
issue of second marriage (per CP)
Sir William de Ros, had Muskham (Notts) d 1310
|
|
Sir William de Ros, d by 1334
|
|
Sir Robert de Ros, with whom CP ends
Wjhonson
Jan 22, 2012, 1:46:47 PM1/22/12
to maxwellf...@hotmail.com, gen-me...@rootsweb.com
I believe the Gilbert you have d.s.p. 1303
Should read "Gilbert, living 34E1 when he was made Knight of the Bath; d.s.p. heir was his brother William"
http://books.google.com/books?id=K3MaAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA15#v=onepage&q=&f=false
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
John Watson
Jan 22, 2012, 4:39:14 PM1/22/12
to
On Jan 23, 1:14 am, Alex Maxwell Findlater
Alex,
I think that you have confused two different Robert de Muschamps.
Isabel de Muschamps who married Ralph de Greasley was the daughter of
Robert de Mushamps (d. bef. Jul 1212) of Derbyshire, who was the son
of a Hugh de Muschamps.
Thomas de Muschamps of Northumberland was the son of Stephen de Bulmer
and Cecily, daughter of Robert de Muschamps (d. bef. 1180) . See
William Farrer, Early Yorkshire Charters, Vol. II (Edinburgh: 1915) p.
127.
Regards,
John
I think that you have confused two different Robert de Muschamps.
Isabel de Muschamps who married Ralph de Greasley was the daughter of
Robert de Mushamps (d. bef. Jul 1212) of Derbyshire, who was the son
of a Hugh de Muschamps.
Thomas de Muschamps of Northumberland was the son of Stephen de Bulmer
and Cecily, daughter of Robert de Muschamps (d. bef. 1180) . See
William Farrer, Early Yorkshire Charters, Vol. II (Edinburgh: 1915) p.
127.
Regards,
John
Alex Maxwell Findlater
Jan 22, 2012, 6:01:48 PM1/22/12
to
However I am not sure of the relevance of Robert - Cecily m Stephen de
Bulmer - Thomas of Northumberland, except that this might be Thomas
who married Matilda de Vesci.
Please explain more fully.
John Watson
Jan 22, 2012, 6:49:49 PM1/22/12
to
On Jan 23, 6:01 am, Alex Maxwell Findlater
Alex,
The Thomas de Muschamps (son of Stephen de Bulmer and Cecily de
Muschamps) who held the Barony of Wooler, Northumberland was the
person who married Maud de Vesci according to John's original post in
this thread.
Thomas was succeeded by his son Robert, and he by his son Robert (John
has conflated the two Roberts above). Thomas de Muschamps was probably
dead by 1185, and it seems a bit of a stretch for him to have a son
who died in 1250. The " Stemma Eustachii filii Johannis, Fundatoris
Abbatiae de Alnewike " quoted by John, clearly identifies two Roberts.
My point was - that neither of these two Roberts was the Sir Robert de
Muschamps who was the father of Isabel who married Ralph de Greasley.
Isabel was the daughter of Robert de Muschamps who held lands in
Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire and who died before 8 July 1212 when
his lands were taken into the king's hand (Rot. Lit. Claus, i. 120).
On 23 Nov 1213, Ralph de Gresley fined 500 marks for having the land
of Robert de Muscamp, father of Isabella, his wife (Rot. de Oblatis,
507).
Regards,
John
The Thomas de Muschamps (son of Stephen de Bulmer and Cecily de
Muschamps) who held the Barony of Wooler, Northumberland was the
person who married Maud de Vesci according to John's original post in
this thread.
Thomas was succeeded by his son Robert, and he by his son Robert (John
has conflated the two Roberts above). Thomas de Muschamps was probably
dead by 1185, and it seems a bit of a stretch for him to have a son
who died in 1250. The " Stemma Eustachii filii Johannis, Fundatoris
Abbatiae de Alnewike " quoted by John, clearly identifies two Roberts.
My point was - that neither of these two Roberts was the Sir Robert de
Muschamps who was the father of Isabel who married Ralph de Greasley.
Isabel was the daughter of Robert de Muschamps who held lands in
Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire and who died before 8 July 1212 when
his lands were taken into the king's hand (Rot. Lit. Claus, i. 120).
On 23 Nov 1213, Ralph de Gresley fined 500 marks for having the land
of Robert de Muscamp, father of Isabella, his wife (Rot. de Oblatis,
507).
Regards,
John
Alex Maxwell Findlater
Jan 23, 2012, 2:52:30 AM1/23/12
to
Thank you for this additional information. I have two requests.
Do we know how the Muschamps of Musham relate to the Muschamps of
Wooler?
How sure are you that Thomas de Muschamps died by 1185? The
chronology in the de Vesci family would favour later dates for his
wife, and therefore by implication for his son.
Do we know how the Muschamps of Musham relate to the Muschamps of
Wooler?
How sure are you that Thomas de Muschamps died by 1185? The
chronology in the de Vesci family would favour later dates for his
wife, and therefore by implication for his son.
John Watson
Jan 23, 2012, 3:47:51 AM1/23/12
to
On Jan 23, 2:52 pm, Alex Maxwell Findlater
Alex,
Here are my notes for Thomas de Muschamps of Wooler:
In 1168, the "carta" of Stephen de Bulmer in Northumberland, shows his
son Thomas, "Thomam filium meum" holding 1 fee of the new feoffment
[1].
Stephen de Bulmer and Thomas de Muscamp his heir, "Thomas de Muscamp
haeres meus," approved an arrangement about the fishery on the Tees
between the monks of Reivaulx and Walter de Stainsby [2].
In 1172, Thomas son of Stephen de Bulmer paid 100s. scutage in
Northumberland [3].
Thomas de Muschamps died in (probably before) 1190, when Robert his
son gave 200 marks for his relief [4].
In 1182, Thomas de Muschamps paid 35l. 18d. for his lands in
Northumberland. He appears in the Pipe Roll of 1183, but in 1185, his
lands were in the king's custody [5].
Sources:
1. John Hodgson, History of Northumberland, Part III, Vol. III
(Newcastle: 1835) p. 303
2. Surtees Society, Vol. 83, Cartularium Abbathiae de Rievalle
(Durham: 1889) p. 221, No. CCCXV
3. John Hodgson, History of Northumberland, Part III, Vol. III
(Newcastle: 1835) p. 21
4. William Farrer, Early Yorkshire Charters, Vol. II (Edinburgh: 1915)
p. 127
5. John Hodgson, History of Northumberland, Part III, Vol. III
(Newcastle: 1835) pp. 34-37
Here are my notes for Thomas de Muschamps of Wooler:
In 1168, the "carta" of Stephen de Bulmer in Northumberland, shows his
son Thomas, "Thomam filium meum" holding 1 fee of the new feoffment
[1].
Stephen de Bulmer and Thomas de Muscamp his heir, "Thomas de Muscamp
haeres meus," approved an arrangement about the fishery on the Tees
between the monks of Reivaulx and Walter de Stainsby [2].
In 1172, Thomas son of Stephen de Bulmer paid 100s. scutage in
Northumberland [3].
Thomas de Muschamps died in (probably before) 1190, when Robert his
son gave 200 marks for his relief [4].
In 1182, Thomas de Muschamps paid 35l. 18d. for his lands in
Northumberland. He appears in the Pipe Roll of 1183, but in 1185, his
lands were in the king's custody [5].
Sources:
1. John Hodgson, History of Northumberland, Part III, Vol. III
(Newcastle: 1835) p. 303
2. Surtees Society, Vol. 83, Cartularium Abbathiae de Rievalle
(Durham: 1889) p. 221, No. CCCXV
3. John Hodgson, History of Northumberland, Part III, Vol. III
(Newcastle: 1835) p. 21
4. William Farrer, Early Yorkshire Charters, Vol. II (Edinburgh: 1915)
p. 127
5. John Hodgson, History of Northumberland, Part III, Vol. III
(Newcastle: 1835) pp. 34-37
John Watson
Jan 23, 2012, 4:13:16 AM1/23/12
to
On Jan 23, 2:52 pm, Alex Maxwell Findlater
Alex,
How the Muschamps of Northumberland connect with those of
Nottinghamshire I do not know. There is an account of the Muschamps of
South Muskam in Thoroton's Nottinghamshire, which you can read online
here:
Thoroton's History of Nottinghamshire: volume 3: Republished with
large additions by John Throsby (1796), pp. 148-152.
URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=76947
Regards,
John
How the Muschamps of Northumberland connect with those of
Nottinghamshire I do not know. There is an account of the Muschamps of
South Muskam in Thoroton's Nottinghamshire, which you can read online
here:
Thoroton's History of Nottinghamshire: volume 3: Republished with
large additions by John Throsby (1796), pp. 148-152.
URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=76947
Regards,
John
John P. Ravilious
Jan 23, 2012, 7:55:55 PM1/23/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
----------------------
Monday, 23 January, 2012
Dear John,
Thanks for that. You are quite right: the Muschamps of South
Muskam, Northants. were a different family, or a (senior ?) branch of
the same family as the Muschamps of Berwickshire and Northumberland.
The latter had a grant of Wooler from Henry I, so they branched off
quite early if they were of the same stem.
As to the issue of one or two Roberts de Muschamp, the record
from the priory of Alnwick indicates there were two in succession, and
that the last had a daughter Isabella. This is correct as to the
latter portion (there were two other daughters, Cecily and Marjorie,
not mentioned therein) and as I said, there may have been a second
Robert, but he was not the father of the three coheiresses.
1) The one attested Sir Robert de Muschamp was the son of Matilda
de Vesci. The Register of the Great Seal of Scotland includes
confirmation of charters from Robert de Muschamp to Master William de
Grenlaw concerning lands in Halsington, following which Master William
then granted ' three carucates of land in the territory of the vill of
Halsington, which Lady Matilda, mother of Sir Robert de Muscampo gave
to William fitz John de Honum with Gilia, daughter of the said Matilda
in free marriage ' [1]
2) Sir Robert de Muschamp identified Gilia as his deceased sister
in his charter to Master William de Grenlaw; in the same charter, he
identified Malise, earl of Strathearn and Margeria "my daughter" as
holding a moiety of Halsington [2].
Based on the foregoing, and the charter evidence cited, the
generations of the Muschamp family of Wooler, Northumberland are as
indicated. Again, there may have been a second Robert, son of the
first, but he would have been the brother to the coheiresses, and not
their father.
Cheers,
John
Notes
[1] RMS (1424-1513), p. 20, no. 105:
" Necnon aliam cartam Willemi de Grenlaw .... concessit Deo et
ecclesie beate Marie de Melross et monachis ibid., - tres carucatas
terre in territorio ville de Halsingtoun, quas domina Matilda mater D.
Rob. de Muscampo dedit Wil. filio Joh. de Honum cum Gilia filia dict.
M. in liberum maritagium: ... "
[2] RMS, ibid. The Latin text is found in Cosmo Innes, ed., Liber
Sancte Marie de Melros: munimenta vetustiora Monasterii Cisterciensis
de Melros (Edinburgh: printed for the Bannatyne Club, 1837), Volume 1,
pp. 207-209, no. 233, which states (salient portions only provided):
" Car' Rob'i de m'campo de t'ra de Halsingto' -
233 Omnib's has Litt'as visuris u' audit'is Rob't' de m'ca'po Sal'm .
Noverit vniu'sitas v'ra me dedisse co'cessisse 't hac p'senti carta
mea co'firmasse Mag'ro Will'o de Grenlaw p' homagio 't s'uicio suo cu'
t'ra q' ei 'us dedi in excambi'u vnius carucate t're i' t'ritorio
ville de Halsigton duas carucatas t're in eode' t'ritorio illas
scilicet que date fueru't d'no Will'mo filio Joh'nis cu' Gilia q'nda'
sorore mea in lib'um maritagiu' • Tenend • 't possidend' d'c'o mag'ro
• W • et h'redib's suis ut suis assignatis 't eo' h'redib's p' has
rectas diuisas p' q's d'c'e due carucate ..............
• Si u' euen'it q'd ego 't h'redes mei p' p'dca villa de Halsi'gton
nullu' forinsecu' s'uiciu' aliq' t'pe facere debeam' eo q'd Malys
comes de strathern de Margeria filia mea h'redes habuerit et puentu'
fuerit ad t'tiu h'rede' meu'.....
• In cui' rei testimoniu' p'senti carte sigillu' meu' duxi apponend'
• Hiis Testib's • D'no Odenell de ford • D'no Alano de Harecarres •
D'no Rog' de Togkesden' • D'no Jame de Howburn' • D'no Will'o de
m'ca'po • D'no Walt'o de Wotton' . D'no • W • pessun p' de Duns • Rob'
cl'ico mag'ri • W • de Trent • Will'o de Alington • Henr' de berigdon'
• Ada de Nueres • Radulfo de pleycis • Joh'e pistore • de Cheuelingham
• 't aliis "
John P. Ravilious
Jan 24, 2012, 12:27:35 PM1/24/12
to
On Jan 22, 1:14 pm, Alex Maxwell Findlater
----------------------
Dear Alex,
Thanks for your earlier message. As John Watson had separately
indicated, the Muschamps of South Muskham, Notts. were a separate
family during this period, so the connection to the de Gresley family
and de Ros of Ingmanthorpe does not apply to the Muschamps of Wooler.
Thanks too for the details provided re: the claim of William de
Carliol, or Carlyle, on the de Vesci barony. It is interesting that
this information did not make its way into the Scots Peerage account
of the family (cf. SP II:377-379, sub Lord Carlyle).
I wouold suggest that Matilda de Vesci m. Thomas de Muschamps (d.
1190) as her first husband, and Adam de Carliol (Carlyle, d. aft 1212)
as her second. Aside from the chronological niceties, the known
representative of the Muschamps in 1316 was Sir John de Graham of
Abercorn, son and heir of Sir Nicholas de Graham and his wife Mary of
Strathearn (2nd daughter and eventual heiress of her mother Marjorie
de Muschamp). Sir John de Graham was a supporter of The Bruce in
1314, and was forfeited by Edward II on 12 June 1314, his lands being
granted to Hugh le Despenser. He would have had no recognized claim
in the de Vesci case (in England anyway) in 1316; hence the Carlyle
claim, such as it was. It is also interesting that shortly after the
award in favour of de Aton, that Carlyle had 'gone over' to the Scots,
his lands being forfeit in July 1317 and granted to William de
Montagu.
Cheers,
John
Eustace fitz = Beatrice Robert de = Hawise
John, d. 1157 I de Vesci Stuteville I
I ________I
I I
William de Vesci = Burga de
of Alnwick I Stuteville
d. 1183 I
______________________I
I I
Eustace Matilda = 1) Thomas de = 2) Adam de
de Vesci de Vesci I Muschamps I Carliol
d. 1216 I d. 1190 I______
_____________________I____________ I
I I I I I
Sir Robert William Stephen Gilla Eudo de
de Muschamps = William Carlyle
d. bef 24 Sept 1250 de Honum d. ca 1230
= Isabel I
_______I__________________ I
I I I I
Cecily Marjorie Isabel Sir William
= Odinel = Malise = Walter de de Carlyle
de Ford Earl of Huntercomb I
Strathearn d. 1271 I
d. bef 23 Nov 1271 William
I
I
Sir William
(the claimant,
1316)
= Margaret de Brus
Dear Alex,
Thanks for your earlier message. As John Watson had separately
indicated, the Muschamps of South Muskham, Notts. were a separate
family during this period, so the connection to the de Gresley family
and de Ros of Ingmanthorpe does not apply to the Muschamps of Wooler.
Thanks too for the details provided re: the claim of William de
Carliol, or Carlyle, on the de Vesci barony. It is interesting that
this information did not make its way into the Scots Peerage account
of the family (cf. SP II:377-379, sub Lord Carlyle).
I wouold suggest that Matilda de Vesci m. Thomas de Muschamps (d.
1190) as her first husband, and Adam de Carliol (Carlyle, d. aft 1212)
as her second. Aside from the chronological niceties, the known
representative of the Muschamps in 1316 was Sir John de Graham of
Abercorn, son and heir of Sir Nicholas de Graham and his wife Mary of
Strathearn (2nd daughter and eventual heiress of her mother Marjorie
de Muschamp). Sir John de Graham was a supporter of The Bruce in
1314, and was forfeited by Edward II on 12 June 1314, his lands being
granted to Hugh le Despenser. He would have had no recognized claim
in the de Vesci case (in England anyway) in 1316; hence the Carlyle
claim, such as it was. It is also interesting that shortly after the
award in favour of de Aton, that Carlyle had 'gone over' to the Scots,
his lands being forfeit in July 1317 and granted to William de
Montagu.
Cheers,
John
Eustace fitz = Beatrice Robert de = Hawise
John, d. 1157 I de Vesci Stuteville I
I ________I
I I
William de Vesci = Burga de
of Alnwick I Stuteville
d. 1183 I
______________________I
Eustace Matilda = 1) Thomas de = 2) Adam de
de Vesci de Vesci I Muschamps I Carliol
d. 1216 I d. 1190 I______
_____________________I____________ I
I I I I I
Sir Robert William Stephen Gilla Eudo de
de Muschamps = William Carlyle
d. bef 24 Sept 1250 de Honum d. ca 1230
= Isabel I
_______I__________________ I
I I I I
Cecily Marjorie Isabel Sir William
= Odinel = Malise = Walter de de Carlyle
de Ford Earl of Huntercomb I
Strathearn d. 1271 I
d. bef 23 Nov 1271 William
I
I
Sir William
(the claimant,
1316)
= Margaret de Brus
Douglas Richardson
Jan 24, 2012, 12:35:22 PM1/24/12
to
Dear John ~
Great post. Thanks for sharing this information on the Vescy and
Muschamp families here on the newsgroup.
You mentioned that Sir Eustace de Vescy (died 1216), the Magna Carta
baron, had a younger brother, Warin de Vescy, and sisters, Maud and
Cecily de Vescy.
Complete Peerage 12(2) (1959): 275, footnote g, and 285, footnote g
(sub Vescy) mentions Eustace de Vescy's younger brother, Warin de
Vescy.
I can yet another sibling, Richard de Vescy, who witnessed an undated
charter of his brother, Eustace de Vescy. This charter is recorded in
the cartulary of Kelso Abbey published in Innes, Liber S. Marie de
Calchou, 1 (1846):173, and may be viewed at the following weblink:
http://www.archive.org/stream/libersmariedeca01kels#page/172/mode/2up
The Kelso Abbey cartulary also includes charters of Sir Eustace de
Vescy's wife, Margaret, who was an illegitimate daughter of William
the Lion, King of Scots.
Sincerely, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Great post. Thanks for sharing this information on the Vescy and
Muschamp families here on the newsgroup.
You mentioned that Sir Eustace de Vescy (died 1216), the Magna Carta
baron, had a younger brother, Warin de Vescy, and sisters, Maud and
Cecily de Vescy.
Complete Peerage 12(2) (1959): 275, footnote g, and 285, footnote g
(sub Vescy) mentions Eustace de Vescy's younger brother, Warin de
Vescy.
I can yet another sibling, Richard de Vescy, who witnessed an undated
charter of his brother, Eustace de Vescy. This charter is recorded in
the cartulary of Kelso Abbey published in Innes, Liber S. Marie de
Calchou, 1 (1846):173, and may be viewed at the following weblink:
http://www.archive.org/stream/libersmariedeca01kels#page/172/mode/2up
The Kelso Abbey cartulary also includes charters of Sir Eustace de
Vescy's wife, Margaret, who was an illegitimate daughter of William
the Lion, King of Scots.
Sincerely, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Douglas Richardson
Jan 24, 2012, 2:59:44 PM1/24/12
to
Revised copy of earlier post. DR
Dear John ~
Great post. Thanks for sharing this information on the Vescy and
Muschamp families here on the newsgroup.
You mentioned that Sir Eustace de Vescy (died 1216), the Magna Carta
baron, had a younger brother, Warin de Vescy, and sisters, Maud and
Cecily de Vescy.
Complete Peerage 12(2) (1959): 275, footnote g, and 285, footnote g
(sub Vescy) mentions Eustace de Vescy's younger brother, Warin de
Vescy.
I can add yet another sibling, Richard de Vescy, who witnessed an
Dear John ~
Great post. Thanks for sharing this information on the Vescy and
Muschamp families here on the newsgroup.
You mentioned that Sir Eustace de Vescy (died 1216), the Magna Carta
baron, had a younger brother, Warin de Vescy, and sisters, Maud and
Cecily de Vescy.
Complete Peerage 12(2) (1959): 275, footnote g, and 285, footnote g
(sub Vescy) mentions Eustace de Vescy's younger brother, Warin de
Vescy.
John Watson
Jan 24, 2012, 4:25:23 PM1/24/12
to
Warin de Vescy, ancestor of the Aton family, according to a charter of
Watton Priory in Yorkshire, was an illegitimate half-brother of
Eustace de Vescy.
"Et iste Will. bastard genuit Warinum, qui vocatur Warinus de Vescey,
ex una ancilla ejusdam nutricis, in castello de Malton in ... et quia
nutritus fuit cum Eustachio filio Willelmi de Vescey; ideo vocabatur
Warinus de Vescey. Qui Warinus desponsavit Matildem filiam Walranni de
Wellon., et genuit ex ea Matildem et Marjoriam, filias et haeredes;
quarum una fuit desponsata Gilberto de Aton, et sic linealiter, de
haerede in haeredem, usque Gilbertum modo petentem"
William Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicanum, Vol 6, Part 2 (London:
1817-1830) p. 957, Watton No. XII, Stemma Fundatorum Istius Domum
Regards,
John
Douglas Richardson
Jan 24, 2012, 5:58:33 PM1/24/12
to
Dear John ~
Richard de Vescy, brother of Sir Eustace de Vescy (died 1216), is
likely the man of that name who served as rector of Melling,
Lancashire from c.1215 to 1245. See VCH Lancaster 8 (1914): 186-191,
which may be viewed at the folloiwing weblink:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=53295&strquery=%22Richard%20de%20Vescy%22#n32
This same Richard de Vescy is elsewhere mentioned in a later fine
dated 1246 involving Margaret of Scotland, widow of Hubert de Burgh,
Earl of Kent, which fine is published in Farrer, Final Concords of
Lancaster 1 (Lanc. & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 39) (1899): 94–96. This
record may be viewed at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=U1MJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA94
Eustace de Vescy's wife, Margaret of Scotland, was the illegitimate
half-sister of Margaret of Scotland, Countess of Kent.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Richard de Vescy, brother of Sir Eustace de Vescy (died 1216), is
likely the man of that name who served as rector of Melling,
Lancashire from c.1215 to 1245. See VCH Lancaster 8 (1914): 186-191,
which may be viewed at the folloiwing weblink:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=53295&strquery=%22Richard%20de%20Vescy%22#n32
This same Richard de Vescy is elsewhere mentioned in a later fine
dated 1246 involving Margaret of Scotland, widow of Hubert de Burgh,
Earl of Kent, which fine is published in Farrer, Final Concords of
Lancaster 1 (Lanc. & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 39) (1899): 94–96. This
record may be viewed at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=U1MJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA94
Eustace de Vescy's wife, Margaret of Scotland, was the illegitimate
half-sister of Margaret of Scotland, Countess of Kent.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
John P. Ravilious
Jan 25, 2012, 8:09:14 AM1/25/12
to
On Jan 24, 5:58 pm, Douglas Richardson <royalances...@msn.com> wrote:
> Dear John ~
>
> Richard de Vescy, brother of Sir Eustace de Vescy (died 1216), is
> likely the man of that name who served as rector of Melling,
> Lancashire from c.1215 to 1245. See VCH Lancaster 8 (1914): 186-191,
> which may be viewed at the folloiwing weblink:
>
> http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=53295&strquery=%2...
> Dear John ~
>
> Richard de Vescy, brother of Sir Eustace de Vescy (died 1216), is
> likely the man of that name who served as rector of Melling,
> Lancashire from c.1215 to 1245. See VCH Lancaster 8 (1914): 186-191,
> which may be viewed at the folloiwing weblink:
>
>
> This same Richard de Vescy is elsewhere mentioned in a later fine
> dated 1246 involving Margaret of Scotland, widow of Hubert de Burgh,
> Earl of Kent, which fine is published in Farrer, Final Concords of
> Lancaster 1 (Lanc. & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 39) (1899): 94–96. This
> record may be viewed at the following weblink:
>
> http://books.google.com/books?id=U1MJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA94
>
> Eustace de Vescy's wife, Margaret of Scotland, was the illegitimate
> half-sister of Margaret of Scotland, Countess of Kent.
>
> Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
------------------------
> This same Richard de Vescy is elsewhere mentioned in a later fine
> dated 1246 involving Margaret of Scotland, widow of Hubert de Burgh,
> Earl of Kent, which fine is published in Farrer, Final Concords of
> Lancaster 1 (Lanc. & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 39) (1899): 94–96. This
> record may be viewed at the following weblink:
>
> http://books.google.com/books?id=U1MJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA94
>
> Eustace de Vescy's wife, Margaret of Scotland, was the illegitimate
> half-sister of Margaret of Scotland, Countess of Kent.
>
> Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear John and Douglas,
Thanks for your replies and the valuable additions re: the de
Vescis. *I have changed the thread title back, and started a separate
thread including your related messages.
Going back to a prior tangent, I have noted that there was indeed
a Robert de Muschamp, son of the earlier Robert, which comports with
that aspect of the Alnwick priory record. He granted lands in
Troughburn, Northumberland (near Hartlepool) to Melrose priory [1],
which grants were shortly afterward recognized by Pope Honorius III on
21 May 1222, and the subject of a composition involving the priories
of Brinkburn and Durham in 1223 [2].
At the date of these charters, Robert de Muschamp, son of Robert
was certainly married, and one would assume given the grants that he
was of age, born sometime before 21 May 1201 {certainly the first
grant occurred some time prior to Pope Honorius III learning of it].
This Robert could be an older brother of the daughters of coheirs of
Robert de Muschamp (d. 1250) as I previously proposed; however,
further research is certainly merited, as the following may turn out
to be a more accurate pedigree.
[NOTE: the following is a conjectural chart, and is
presented for discussion purposes only. Further
research is under way.]
William de Vesci = Burga de
of Alnwick I Stuteville
_________I__
I I
Eustace Matilda = 1) Thomas de = 2) Adam de
de Vesci de Vesci I Muschamps I Carlyle
Eustace Matilda = 1) Thomas de = 2) Adam de
d. 1216 I {Alnwick V
I priory record}
I
(?) Robert de = Matilda
Muschamps I (surname unknown)
______I
___I______________________________
I I I I
Sir Robert William Stephen Gilla
de Muschamps = William
[grantor to Melrose, de Honum
1222 or before]
d. bef 24 Sept 1250
= Isabel
_________I_______________
I I I
Cecily Marjorie Isabel
= Odinel = Malise = Walter de
de Ford Earl of Huntercomb
Strathearn d. 1271
d. bef 23 Nov 1271
Cheers,
_________I_______________
I I I
Cecily Marjorie Isabel
= Odinel = Malise = Walter de
de Ford Earl of Huntercomb
Strathearn d. 1271
d. bef 23 Nov 1271
John
Notes
[1] Cosmo Innes, ed., Liber Sancte Marie de Melros: munimenta
vetustiora Monasterii Cisterciensis de Melros (Edinburgh: printed for
the Bannatyne Club, 1837), Volume 1, pp. 267-270, nos. 305-307.
[2] Innes, ibid., pp. 270-272, no. 308.
Douglas Richardson
Jan 25, 2012, 2:49:59 PM1/25/12
to
Dear John ~
Register, or Rolls, of Walter Gray, Lord Archbishop of York (Surtees
Soc. 56) (1872): 20 has an item dated 1228 regarding Richard de
Vescy. In a note on page 327, the modern editor identifies Richard de
Vescy, living 1228, as the son of Eustace de Vescy. lord of Alnwick,
Northumberland. The editor adds on pg. 327 that this Richard de Vescy
was canon of Beverley, and rector of Chatton in Northumberland.
The item in Archbishop Gray's Register pg. 20 may be viewed at the
following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=ytkKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA20
Here is a copy of the information on page 20 which related to Richard
de Vescy:
"XCI. Knarreburg, 3 id. Jan. xiii. License to Richard de Vescy, ' cum
mercatoribus Romanis graviter esset obligatus,' to sell the fruits of
his rents for the ensuing autumn, viz. in 1228, 'non obstante
Constitutione nostra, in qua prohibuimus ne aliquis beneficiatus
fructus suos ante diem S. Marci Evangelistae vendere possit, vel ipsa
beneficia impignorare.'" END OF QUOTE.
From the Kelso Abbey evidence I've already presented and the
information presented above, it appears that Sir Eustace de Vescy, the
Magna Carta baron, had a brother and a son both named Richard de
Vescy.
Register, or Rolls, of Walter Gray, Lord Archbishop of York (Surtees
Soc. 56) (1872): 20 has an item dated 1228 regarding Richard de
Vescy. In a note on page 327, the modern editor identifies Richard de
Vescy, living 1228, as the son of Eustace de Vescy. lord of Alnwick,
Northumberland. The editor adds on pg. 327 that this Richard de Vescy
was canon of Beverley, and rector of Chatton in Northumberland.
The item in Archbishop Gray's Register pg. 20 may be viewed at the
following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=ytkKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA20
Here is a copy of the information on page 20 which related to Richard
de Vescy:
"XCI. Knarreburg, 3 id. Jan. xiii. License to Richard de Vescy, ' cum
mercatoribus Romanis graviter esset obligatus,' to sell the fruits of
his rents for the ensuing autumn, viz. in 1228, 'non obstante
Constitutione nostra, in qua prohibuimus ne aliquis beneficiatus
fructus suos ante diem S. Marci Evangelistae vendere possit, vel ipsa
beneficia impignorare.'" END OF QUOTE.
From the Kelso Abbey evidence I've already presented and the
information presented above, it appears that Sir Eustace de Vescy, the
Magna Carta baron, had a brother and a son both named Richard de
Vescy.
0 new messages