C.P. Addition: Desiderata de Leybourne, wife of Geoffrey de
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Douglas Richardson royala
C.P. Addition: Desiderata de Leybourne, wife of Geoffrey de
Dear Newsgroup ~
I don't presently have a copy of the Lucy account of Complete Peerage
in front of me, but, as I recall, it identified Desiderée (or
Desiderata), wife of Geoffrey de Lucy (died 1305), of Cublington,
Buckinghamshire, etc., as a probable member of the Leybourne family of
Kent.
I have located three records which support the identification of
Desiderée (or Desiderata) Lucy as a Leybourne. In the first document,
I find that Desiderata Lucy was involved in a suit dated 1327-8 with
Juliane de Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon, doubtless her kinswoman.
The second document concerns the settlement in 1330-1 of various manors
in Kent and Hampshire on William de Clinton, Earl of Huntingdon, and
his wife, Juliane de Leybourne, which manors are said to be "expectant
on the death of Desiderata late the wife of Geoffrey de Lucy." In the
third record, a certain Katherine de Lucy (alias Bolour), is
specifically styled "kinswoman" [cognate] by Juliane de Leybourne,
Countess of Huntingdon. This Katherine de Lucy can be identified as
the daughter of Geoffrey and Desiderata de Lucy. As such, this record
confirms that there was indeed a kinship between the Lucy and Leybourne
families.
I have not tried to place Desiderée (or Desiderata) de Lucy into the
Leybourne family tree, but I imagine the manors which she held for her
life would hold the clue to her parentage. In the fourth document
below, most of the manors which Desiderate de Lucy is said to have held
as a life estate in 1330-1 are listed in 1370/1 to 1371/2, as being
properties formerly held by Juliana de Leybourne, Countess of
Huntingdon, following the Countess's death in 1367.
I note that Jim Weber's great database speculates that Desiderée (or
Desiderata) de Lucy might have been the daughter of Roger II de
Leybourne, died c. 1271, by his 2nd wife, Eleanor de Ferrers. He
notes, however, that this is a tentative parentage only. He also
considers the possibility that Desiderée (or Desiderata) might be the
daughter of Roger II's son and heir, William. Either parentage would
make Desiderée (or Desiderata) de Lucy a near kinswoman of Juliana de
Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon.
If anyone has details which might shed light on the Lucy-Leybourne
connection, I'd appreciate hearing from them here on the newsgroup.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Source: Online National Archives Catalog
(http://www.catalogue.nationalarchives.gov.uk/search.asp):
l. PRO Document, JUST 1/403/11: Special assize roll and file,
Desiderata Lucy v Juliana Leybourne, Date: 1 Edward III [1327-8].
2. PRO Document, E 210/1356: Martin Erthbaud and Walter de Leghton to
William de Clynton and Juliana his wife : Manors of Overland and
Elmstone ( Eylmersheton ), advowsons of Ashford ( Esschetisford ),
Leybourne, and Harrietsham, land in North Eastling ( Eselyngg ),
Ospringe, and Headcorn ( Hetecrone ), and other lands in Kent, and the
manor of Winchfield, co. Hants, expectant on the death of Desiderata
late the wife of Geoffrey de Lucy : Kent. Hants. Date: 4 Edward III
[1330-1].
3. SC 6/898/27, Issues of lands late of Juliana de Leybourne, Countess
of Huntingdon): Wateringbury (Wotringburi): [Kent] Leybourne: [Kent]
Ashford (Essheccefford): [Kent] Mongeham, Great (Upmonyngham): [Kent]
Elham: [Kent] Pakemanston: -- Ham: [Kent] Harrietsham (Heryetesham):
[Kent] Buckwell (Berton Bukwelle): [Kent] Colbridge: [Kent] Beaurepeyr:
-- Elmstone (Elmerston): [Kent] Overland: [Kent] Gore (la Gore): [Kent]
Preston: [Kent] ? Ashling (Eselyng): [Sussex] Wodelyng: -- Description
of Officer: Receiver. Date: 44 to 45 [Edw III] [1370/71 to 1371/2]
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Source: Descriptive Catalog of Ancient Deeds
1. Katherine de Lucy styled "cousin" [cognate] of Julian de
Hastynges, countess of Huntyngdon [Reference: Desc. Cat. of Ancient
Deeds 5 (1906): 195].
I don't presently have a copy of the Lucy account of Complete Peerage
in front of me, but, as I recall, it identified Desiderée (or
Desiderata), wife of Geoffrey de Lucy (died 1305), of Cublington,
Buckinghamshire, etc., as a probable member of the Leybourne family of
Kent.
I have located three records which support the identification of
Desiderée (or Desiderata) Lucy as a Leybourne. In the first document,
I find that Desiderata Lucy was involved in a suit dated 1327-8 with
Juliane de Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon, doubtless her kinswoman.
The second document concerns the settlement in 1330-1 of various manors
in Kent and Hampshire on William de Clinton, Earl of Huntingdon, and
his wife, Juliane de Leybourne, which manors are said to be "expectant
on the death of Desiderata late the wife of Geoffrey de Lucy." In the
third record, a certain Katherine de Lucy (alias Bolour), is
specifically styled "kinswoman" [cognate] by Juliane de Leybourne,
Countess of Huntingdon. This Katherine de Lucy can be identified as
the daughter of Geoffrey and Desiderata de Lucy. As such, this record
confirms that there was indeed a kinship between the Lucy and Leybourne
families.
I have not tried to place Desiderée (or Desiderata) de Lucy into the
Leybourne family tree, but I imagine the manors which she held for her
life would hold the clue to her parentage. In the fourth document
below, most of the manors which Desiderate de Lucy is said to have held
as a life estate in 1330-1 are listed in 1370/1 to 1371/2, as being
properties formerly held by Juliana de Leybourne, Countess of
Huntingdon, following the Countess's death in 1367.
I note that Jim Weber's great database speculates that Desiderée (or
Desiderata) de Lucy might have been the daughter of Roger II de
Leybourne, died c. 1271, by his 2nd wife, Eleanor de Ferrers. He
notes, however, that this is a tentative parentage only. He also
considers the possibility that Desiderée (or Desiderata) might be the
daughter of Roger II's son and heir, William. Either parentage would
make Desiderée (or Desiderata) de Lucy a near kinswoman of Juliana de
Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon.
If anyone has details which might shed light on the Lucy-Leybourne
connection, I'd appreciate hearing from them here on the newsgroup.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Source: Online National Archives Catalog
(http://www.catalogue.nationalarchives.gov.uk/search.asp):
l. PRO Document, JUST 1/403/11: Special assize roll and file,
Desiderata Lucy v Juliana Leybourne, Date: 1 Edward III [1327-8].
2. PRO Document, E 210/1356: Martin Erthbaud and Walter de Leghton to
William de Clynton and Juliana his wife : Manors of Overland and
Elmstone ( Eylmersheton ), advowsons of Ashford ( Esschetisford ),
Leybourne, and Harrietsham, land in North Eastling ( Eselyngg ),
Ospringe, and Headcorn ( Hetecrone ), and other lands in Kent, and the
manor of Winchfield, co. Hants, expectant on the death of Desiderata
late the wife of Geoffrey de Lucy : Kent. Hants. Date: 4 Edward III
[1330-1].
3. SC 6/898/27, Issues of lands late of Juliana de Leybourne, Countess
of Huntingdon): Wateringbury (Wotringburi): [Kent] Leybourne: [Kent]
Ashford (Essheccefford): [Kent] Mongeham, Great (Upmonyngham): [Kent]
Elham: [Kent] Pakemanston: -- Ham: [Kent] Harrietsham (Heryetesham):
[Kent] Buckwell (Berton Bukwelle): [Kent] Colbridge: [Kent] Beaurepeyr:
-- Elmstone (Elmerston): [Kent] Overland: [Kent] Gore (la Gore): [Kent]
Preston: [Kent] ? Ashling (Eselyng): [Sussex] Wodelyng: -- Description
of Officer: Receiver. Date: 44 to 45 [Edw III] [1370/71 to 1371/2]
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Source: Descriptive Catalog of Ancient Deeds
1. Katherine de Lucy styled "cousin" [cognate] of Julian de
Hastynges, countess of Huntyngdon [Reference: Desc. Cat. of Ancient
Deeds 5 (1906): 195].
-
Chris Phillips
Re: C.P. Addition: Desiderata de Leybourne, wife of Geoffrey
Douglas Richardson wrote:
<<
I don't presently have a copy of the Lucy account of Complete Peerage
in front of me, but, as I recall, it identified Desiderée (or
Desiderata), wife of Geoffrey de Lucy (died 1305), of Cublington,
Buckinghamshire, etc., as a probable member of the Leybourne family of
Kent.
CP's comment on Desiderée's parentage is as follows (vol. 8, p. 260, note
h):
"She was possibly a Leyburn; on 23 Dec. 1284 his marriage was granted to
William de Leyburn ([Cal. Patent Rolls], 1281-92, p. 147); later Henry de
Leyburn was one of his trustees ([Cal. Patent Rolls], 1292-1301, p. 300)."
Chris Phillips
<<
I don't presently have a copy of the Lucy account of Complete Peerage
in front of me, but, as I recall, it identified Desiderée (or
Desiderata), wife of Geoffrey de Lucy (died 1305), of Cublington,
Buckinghamshire, etc., as a probable member of the Leybourne family of
Kent.
CP's comment on Desiderée's parentage is as follows (vol. 8, p. 260, note
h):
"She was possibly a Leyburn; on 23 Dec. 1284 his marriage was granted to
William de Leyburn ([Cal. Patent Rolls], 1281-92, p. 147); later Henry de
Leyburn was one of his trustees ([Cal. Patent Rolls], 1292-1301, p. 300)."
Chris Phillips
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: C.P. Addition: Desiderata de Leybourne, wife of Geoffrey
Dear Chris ~
Thanks for posting the exact information from Complete Peerage
regarding Desiderée de Lucy's parentage. Much appreciated.
For interest's sake, the following is the list of the 17th Century
colonial immigrants who descend from Geoffrey de Lucy and his wife,
Desiderée:
l. Robert Abell.
2. Nathaniel Littleton.
3. Richard More (Mayflower passenger).
4. John Oxenbridge.
5. Mary Johanna Somerset.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Chris Phillips wrote:
Thanks for posting the exact information from Complete Peerage
regarding Desiderée de Lucy's parentage. Much appreciated.
For interest's sake, the following is the list of the 17th Century
colonial immigrants who descend from Geoffrey de Lucy and his wife,
Desiderée:
l. Robert Abell.
2. Nathaniel Littleton.
3. Richard More (Mayflower passenger).
4. John Oxenbridge.
5. Mary Johanna Somerset.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Chris Phillips wrote:
Douglas Richardson wrote:
I don't presently have a copy of the Lucy account of Complete Peerage
in front of me, but, as I recall, it identified Desiderée (or
Desiderata), wife of Geoffrey de Lucy (died 1305), of Cublington,
Buckinghamshire, etc., as a probable member of the Leybourne family of
Kent.
CP's comment on Desiderée's parentage is as follows (vol. 8, p. 260, note
h):
"She was possibly a Leyburn; on 23 Dec. 1284 his marriage was granted to
William de Leyburn ([Cal. Patent Rolls], 1281-92, p. 147); later Henry de
Leyburn was one of his trustees ([Cal. Patent Rolls], 1292-1301, p. 300)."
Chris Phillips
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: C.P. Addition: Desiderata de Leybourne, wife of Geoffrey
Dear Newsgroup ~
In my post earlier this week, I stated that a certain Katherine de Lucy
(alias Bolour) was styled "kinswoman" [cognate] by Juliane de
Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon. I identified Katherine de Lucy as
the daughter of Geoffrey de Lucy (died 1305), of Cublington,
Buckinghamshire, by his wife, Desiderée (or Desiderata) (probably a
Leybourne).
It appears that Katherine de Lucy was actually a grandchild of Geoffrey
and Desiderée, not their child. Countess Juliane's grant to Katherine
de Lucy took place in 1355, presumably at the time of Katherine's
marriage to Robert Bolour, Esq., of Fulbrook (in Hogshaw),
Buckinghamshire. Katherine and Robert Bolour had one son, Thomas
Boulour, Esq., who was living in 1430 [Reference: Cal. Close Rolls
1429-1435 (1933): 66]. I have not traced any descendants of the Bolour
family. If anyone knows of such, I'd appreciate hearing from them here
on the newsgroup.
I noted in my earlier post that Jim Weber's great database has
tentatively identified Desiderée (or Desiderata), wife of Geoffrey de
Lucy, as the daughter of Roger II de Leybourne, died c. 1271, by his
2nd wife, Eleanor de Ferrers. Jim noted, however, that Desiderée (or
Desiderata) might also be the possible child of Roger II de Leybourne's
son and heir, William de Leybourne, by his wife, Juliane, daughter and
heiress of Henry de Sandwich. Based on new research, it appears that
the latter parentage is correct.
As I showed in my earlier post, in 1330-1 Desiderée (or Desiderata) de
Lucy was holding several manors of the Leybourne family for life, with
the reversion going to Juliane de Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon.
Among these manors was Winchfield, Hampshire, which VCH Hampshire shows
was held by Juliane [de Sandwich], widow of William de Leybourne, in
1327-8 at her death. Prior to this date, the manor was held in 1316,
by Sir Fulk Payfrere (or Peyferer), who is thought to have possibly
been the 2nd husband of Julia, widow of Sir Ralph de Sandwich
[Reference: VCH Hampshire 4 (1911): 110]. Sir Ralph obtained 2/3
interest in the manor of Winchfield in 1288-9 from Peter de Bendeng. I
assume the Sir Ralph de Sandwich was the individual of this name who
was Keeper of London in 1292-3.
Since Winchfield, Hampshire was apparently part of the Sandwich
inheritance of Juliane de Sandwich, wife of William de Leyborne, it
seems a logical conclusion that Juliane (de Sandwich) de Leybourne was
the mother of Desiderée (or Desiderata) de Lucy and that the manor of
Winchfield passed from Juliane de Sandwich to her daughter, Desiderée
(or Desiderata) de Lucy.
As for other indications of a Leybourne-Lucy connection, I find that
Geoffrey de Lucy (husband of Desiderée or Desiderata), is on record as
having conveyed the manor of Byfleet, Surrey (a Lucy property) to Henry
de Leybourne in 1293-4. Henry de Leybourne is alleged in various
online ancestral databases to be a younger son of William de Leybourne,
and his wife, Juliane de Sandwich. If correct, then Henry de Leybourne
would have been a brother of Geoffrey de Lucy's wife, Desiderée (or
Desiderata).
Taken together, the above information and the records I posted earlier
are rather solid evidence I think that Desiderée (or Desiderata), wife
of Geoffrey de Lucy, was the daughter of William de Leybourne (died
1310), by Juliane de Sandwich. This would make Desiderée (or
Desiderata) de Lucy a paternal aunt of Juliane de Leybourne, Countess
of Huntingdon. This arrangement would in turn make Countess Juliane a
first cousin once removed to Desiderée (or Desiderata) de Lucy's
granddaughter, Katherine (de Lucy) Bolour.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Douglas Richardson royalancestry@msn.com wrote:
In my post earlier this week, I stated that a certain Katherine de Lucy
(alias Bolour) was styled "kinswoman" [cognate] by Juliane de
Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon. I identified Katherine de Lucy as
the daughter of Geoffrey de Lucy (died 1305), of Cublington,
Buckinghamshire, by his wife, Desiderée (or Desiderata) (probably a
Leybourne).
It appears that Katherine de Lucy was actually a grandchild of Geoffrey
and Desiderée, not their child. Countess Juliane's grant to Katherine
de Lucy took place in 1355, presumably at the time of Katherine's
marriage to Robert Bolour, Esq., of Fulbrook (in Hogshaw),
Buckinghamshire. Katherine and Robert Bolour had one son, Thomas
Boulour, Esq., who was living in 1430 [Reference: Cal. Close Rolls
1429-1435 (1933): 66]. I have not traced any descendants of the Bolour
family. If anyone knows of such, I'd appreciate hearing from them here
on the newsgroup.
I noted in my earlier post that Jim Weber's great database has
tentatively identified Desiderée (or Desiderata), wife of Geoffrey de
Lucy, as the daughter of Roger II de Leybourne, died c. 1271, by his
2nd wife, Eleanor de Ferrers. Jim noted, however, that Desiderée (or
Desiderata) might also be the possible child of Roger II de Leybourne's
son and heir, William de Leybourne, by his wife, Juliane, daughter and
heiress of Henry de Sandwich. Based on new research, it appears that
the latter parentage is correct.
As I showed in my earlier post, in 1330-1 Desiderée (or Desiderata) de
Lucy was holding several manors of the Leybourne family for life, with
the reversion going to Juliane de Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon.
Among these manors was Winchfield, Hampshire, which VCH Hampshire shows
was held by Juliane [de Sandwich], widow of William de Leybourne, in
1327-8 at her death. Prior to this date, the manor was held in 1316,
by Sir Fulk Payfrere (or Peyferer), who is thought to have possibly
been the 2nd husband of Julia, widow of Sir Ralph de Sandwich
[Reference: VCH Hampshire 4 (1911): 110]. Sir Ralph obtained 2/3
interest in the manor of Winchfield in 1288-9 from Peter de Bendeng. I
assume the Sir Ralph de Sandwich was the individual of this name who
was Keeper of London in 1292-3.
Since Winchfield, Hampshire was apparently part of the Sandwich
inheritance of Juliane de Sandwich, wife of William de Leyborne, it
seems a logical conclusion that Juliane (de Sandwich) de Leybourne was
the mother of Desiderée (or Desiderata) de Lucy and that the manor of
Winchfield passed from Juliane de Sandwich to her daughter, Desiderée
(or Desiderata) de Lucy.
As for other indications of a Leybourne-Lucy connection, I find that
Geoffrey de Lucy (husband of Desiderée or Desiderata), is on record as
having conveyed the manor of Byfleet, Surrey (a Lucy property) to Henry
de Leybourne in 1293-4. Henry de Leybourne is alleged in various
online ancestral databases to be a younger son of William de Leybourne,
and his wife, Juliane de Sandwich. If correct, then Henry de Leybourne
would have been a brother of Geoffrey de Lucy's wife, Desiderée (or
Desiderata).
Taken together, the above information and the records I posted earlier
are rather solid evidence I think that Desiderée (or Desiderata), wife
of Geoffrey de Lucy, was the daughter of William de Leybourne (died
1310), by Juliane de Sandwich. This would make Desiderée (or
Desiderata) de Lucy a paternal aunt of Juliane de Leybourne, Countess
of Huntingdon. This arrangement would in turn make Countess Juliane a
first cousin once removed to Desiderée (or Desiderata) de Lucy's
granddaughter, Katherine (de Lucy) Bolour.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Douglas Richardson royalancestry@msn.com wrote:
Dear Newsgroup ~
I don't presently have a copy of the Lucy account of Complete Peerage
in front of me, but, as I recall, it identified Desiderée (or
Desiderata), wife of Geoffrey de Lucy (died 1305), of Cublington,
Buckinghamshire, etc., as a probable member of the Leybourne family of
Kent.
I have located three records which support the identification of
Desiderée (or Desiderata) Lucy as a Leybourne. In the first document,
I find that Desiderata Lucy was involved in a suit dated 1327-8 with
Juliane de Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon, doubtless her kinswoman.
The second document concerns the settlement in 1330-1 of various manors
in Kent and Hampshire on William de Clinton, Earl of Huntingdon, and
his wife, Juliane de Leybourne, which manors are said to be "expectant
on the death of Desiderata late the wife of Geoffrey de Lucy." In the
third record, a certain Katherine de Lucy (alias Bolour), is
specifically styled "kinswoman" [cognate] by Juliane de Leybourne,
Countess of Huntingdon. This Katherine de Lucy can be identified as
the daughter of Geoffrey and Desiderata de Lucy. As such, this record
confirms that there was indeed a kinship between the Lucy and Leybourne
families.
I have not tried to place Desiderée (or Desiderata) de Lucy into the
Leybourne family tree, but I imagine the manors which she held for her
life would hold the clue to her parentage. In the fourth document
below, most of the manors which Desiderate de Lucy is said to have held
as a life estate in 1330-1 are listed in 1370/1 to 1371/2, as being
properties formerly held by Juliana de Leybourne, Countess of
Huntingdon, following the Countess's death in 1367.
I note that Jim Weber's great database speculates that Desiderée (or
Desiderata) de Lucy might have been the daughter of Roger II de
Leybourne, died c. 1271, by his 2nd wife, Eleanor de Ferrers. He
notes, however, that this is a tentative parentage only. He also
considers the possibility that Desiderée (or Desiderata) might be the
daughter of Roger II's son and heir, William. Either parentage would
make Desiderée (or Desiderata) de Lucy a near kinswoman of Juliana de
Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon.
If anyone has details which might shed light on the Lucy-Leybourne
connection, I'd appreciate hearing from them here on the newsgroup.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Source: Online National Archives Catalog
(http://www.catalogue.nationalarchives.gov.uk/search.asp):
l. PRO Document, JUST 1/403/11: Special assize roll and file,
Desiderata Lucy v Juliana Leybourne, Date: 1 Edward III [1327-8].
2. PRO Document, E 210/1356: Martin Erthbaud and Walter de Leghton to
William de Clynton and Juliana his wife : Manors of Overland and
Elmstone ( Eylmersheton ), advowsons of Ashford ( Esschetisford ),
Leybourne, and Harrietsham, land in North Eastling ( Eselyngg ),
Ospringe, and Headcorn ( Hetecrone ), and other lands in Kent, and the
manor of Winchfield, co. Hants, expectant on the death of Desiderata
late the wife of Geoffrey de Lucy : Kent. Hants. Date: 4 Edward III
[1330-1].
3. SC 6/898/27, Issues of lands late of Juliana de Leybourne, Countess
of Huntingdon): Wateringbury (Wotringburi): [Kent] Leybourne: [Kent]
Ashford (Essheccefford): [Kent] Mongeham, Great (Upmonyngham): [Kent]
Elham: [Kent] Pakemanston: -- Ham: [Kent] Harrietsham (Heryetesham):
[Kent] Buckwell (Berton Bukwelle): [Kent] Colbridge: [Kent] Beaurepeyr:
-- Elmstone (Elmerston): [Kent] Overland: [Kent] Gore (la Gore): [Kent]
Preston: [Kent] ? Ashling (Eselyng): [Sussex] Wodelyng: -- Description
of Officer: Receiver. Date: 44 to 45 [Edw III] [1370/71 to 1371/2]
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Source: Descriptive Catalog of Ancient Deeds
1. Katherine de Lucy styled "cousin" [cognate] of Julian de
Hastynges, countess of Huntyngdon [Reference: Desc. Cat. of Ancient
Deeds 5 (1906): 195].
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Re: C.P. Addition: Desiderata de Leybourne, wife of Geoffrey
In message of 2 Aug, "Douglas Richardson royalancestry@msn.com"
<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote:
<snip>
This should be very interesting as the other daughter of William and
Juliane, Idoine, became the eventual and apparent sole heir in her issue
of William de Leyburn on the death of Elizabeth de Say in 1399. So
Idoine was a co-heir. So the heirs of both the daughters of William and
Juliane should have appeared in an IPM for Elizabeth. CP (XI, 478) says
this IPM occurred in 1405 (Ch Inq. p. m. 6 Hen IV, no 21); so it will be
most interesting to see what this says. (I don't have access to the
IPMs, in case anyone wonders.)
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote:
Dear Newsgroup ~
In my post earlier this week, I stated that a certain Katherine de
Lucy (alias Bolour) was styled "kinswoman" [cognate] by Juliane de
Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon. I identified Katherine de Lucy as
the daughter of Geoffrey de Lucy (died 1305), of Cublington,
Buckinghamshire, by his wife, Desiderée (or Desiderata) (probably a
Leybourne).
It appears that Katherine de Lucy was actually a grandchild of
Geoffrey and Desiderée, not their child. Countess Juliane's grant to
Katherine de Lucy took place in 1355, presumably at the time of
Katherine's marriage to Robert Bolour, Esq., of Fulbrook (in Hogshaw),
Buckinghamshire. Katherine and Robert Bolour had one son, Thomas
Boulour, Esq., who was living in 1430 [Reference: Cal. Close Rolls
1429-1435 (1933): 66]. I have not traced any descendants of the
Bolour family. If anyone knows of such, I'd appreciate hearing from
them here on the newsgroup.
I noted in my earlier post that Jim Weber's great database has
tentatively identified Desiderée (or Desiderata), wife of Geoffrey de
Lucy, as the daughter of Roger II de Leybourne, died c. 1271, by his
2nd wife, Eleanor de Ferrers. Jim noted, however, that Desiderée (or
Desiderata) might also be the possible child of Roger II de
Leybourne's son and heir, William de Leybourne, by his wife, Juliane,
daughter and heiress of Henry de Sandwich. Based on new research, it
appears that the latter parentage is correct.
<snip>
This should be very interesting as the other daughter of William and
Juliane, Idoine, became the eventual and apparent sole heir in her issue
of William de Leyburn on the death of Elizabeth de Say in 1399. So
Idoine was a co-heir. So the heirs of both the daughters of William and
Juliane should have appeared in an IPM for Elizabeth. CP (XI, 478) says
this IPM occurred in 1405 (Ch Inq. p. m. 6 Hen IV, no 21); so it will be
most interesting to see what this says. (I don't have access to the
IPMs, in case anyone wonders.)
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Re: C.P. Addition: Desiderata de Leybourne, wife of Geoffrey
In message of 2 Aug, Tim Powys-Lybbe <tim@powys.org> wrote:
Er, umm... The relevant IPM to examine was, of course, when the first
Leyburn line died out, that is on the death of John de Hastings, earl of
Pembroke in 1389. Unfortunately CP gives no details of this, apart
from saying that the barony devolved on the issue of Idoine, only
[sic] da. of William, lord Leyburn. If there was an IPM on the death of
John de Hastings then it should have mentioned the co-heirs to the
Leyburn lands; failing that, I wonder how those lands devolved.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
In message of 2 Aug, "Douglas Richardson royalancestry@msn.com"
royalancestry@msn.com> wrote:
Dear Newsgroup ~
In my post earlier this week, I stated that a certain Katherine de
Lucy (alias Bolour) was styled "kinswoman" [cognate] by Juliane de
Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon. I identified Katherine de Lucy as
the daughter of Geoffrey de Lucy (died 1305), of Cublington,
Buckinghamshire, by his wife, Desiderée (or Desiderata) (probably a
Leybourne).
It appears that Katherine de Lucy was actually a grandchild of
Geoffrey and Desiderée, not their child. Countess Juliane's grant to
Katherine de Lucy took place in 1355, presumably at the time of
Katherine's marriage to Robert Bolour, Esq., of Fulbrook (in Hogshaw),
Buckinghamshire. Katherine and Robert Bolour had one son, Thomas
Boulour, Esq., who was living in 1430 [Reference: Cal. Close Rolls
1429-1435 (1933): 66]. I have not traced any descendants of the
Bolour family. If anyone knows of such, I'd appreciate hearing from
them here on the newsgroup.
I noted in my earlier post that Jim Weber's great database has
tentatively identified Desiderée (or Desiderata), wife of Geoffrey de
Lucy, as the daughter of Roger II de Leybourne, died c. 1271, by his
2nd wife, Eleanor de Ferrers. Jim noted, however, that Desiderée (or
Desiderata) might also be the possible child of Roger II de
Leybourne's son and heir, William de Leybourne, by his wife, Juliane,
daughter and heiress of Henry de Sandwich. Based on new research, it
appears that the latter parentage is correct.
snip
This should be very interesting as the other daughter of William and
Juliane, Idoine, became the eventual and apparent sole heir in her issue
of William de Leyburn on the death of Elizabeth de Say in 1399. So
Idoine was a co-heir. So the heirs of both the daughters of William and
Juliane should have appeared in an IPM for Elizabeth. CP (XI, 478) says
this IPM occurred in 1405 (Ch Inq. p. m. 6 Hen IV, no 21); so it will be
most interesting to see what this says. (I don't have access to the
IPMs, in case anyone wonders.)
Er, umm... The relevant IPM to examine was, of course, when the first
Leyburn line died out, that is on the death of John de Hastings, earl of
Pembroke in 1389. Unfortunately CP gives no details of this, apart
from saying that the barony devolved on the issue of Idoine, only
[sic] da. of William, lord Leyburn. If there was an IPM on the death of
John de Hastings then it should have mentioned the co-heirs to the
Leyburn lands; failing that, I wonder how those lands devolved.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: C.P. Addition: Desiderata de Leybourne, wife of Geoffrey
Dear Tim ~
I think the Leybourne inheritance may be more complicated than normal.
VCH Hampshire 4 (1911): 110 indicates that Juliane de Leybourne,
Countess of Huntingdon, settled the manor of Winchfield, Hampshire on
herself in 1362-3, with reversion to the king. Following her death in
1367, King Edward III granted the manor to trustees, who in 1382
granted it to the dean and canons of the chapel or college of St.
Stephen, Westminster.
So, the manor of Winchfield was removed from the Leybourne inheritance,
and possibly others were as well. This could be why the king took an
inventory of the "issues of lands" late of Juliane Countess of
Huntingdon in 1370/1-1371/2 (see my earlier post). If the king held
the reversion to all these properties, then there would be little left
for the Leybourne heir or co-heir to inherit. This matter requires
more research.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote:
I think the Leybourne inheritance may be more complicated than normal.
VCH Hampshire 4 (1911): 110 indicates that Juliane de Leybourne,
Countess of Huntingdon, settled the manor of Winchfield, Hampshire on
herself in 1362-3, with reversion to the king. Following her death in
1367, King Edward III granted the manor to trustees, who in 1382
granted it to the dean and canons of the chapel or college of St.
Stephen, Westminster.
So, the manor of Winchfield was removed from the Leybourne inheritance,
and possibly others were as well. This could be why the king took an
inventory of the "issues of lands" late of Juliane Countess of
Huntingdon in 1370/1-1371/2 (see my earlier post). If the king held
the reversion to all these properties, then there would be little left
for the Leybourne heir or co-heir to inherit. This matter requires
more research.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote:
In message of 2 Aug, Tim Powys-Lybbe <tim@powys.org> wrote:
In message of 2 Aug, "Douglas Richardson royalancestry@msn.com"
royalancestry@msn.com> wrote:
Dear Newsgroup ~
In my post earlier this week, I stated that a certain Katherine de
Lucy (alias Bolour) was styled "kinswoman" [cognate] by Juliane de
Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon. I identified Katherine de Lucy as
the daughter of Geoffrey de Lucy (died 1305), of Cublington,
Buckinghamshire, by his wife, Desiderée (or Desiderata) (probably a
Leybourne).
It appears that Katherine de Lucy was actually a grandchild of
Geoffrey and Desiderée, not their child. Countess Juliane's grant to
Katherine de Lucy took place in 1355, presumably at the time of
Katherine's marriage to Robert Bolour, Esq., of Fulbrook (in Hogshaw),
Buckinghamshire. Katherine and Robert Bolour had one son, Thomas
Boulour, Esq., who was living in 1430 [Reference: Cal. Close Rolls
1429-1435 (1933): 66]. I have not traced any descendants of the
Bolour family. If anyone knows of such, I'd appreciate hearing from
them here on the newsgroup.
I noted in my earlier post that Jim Weber's great database has
tentatively identified Desiderée (or Desiderata), wife of Geoffrey de
Lucy, as the daughter of Roger II de Leybourne, died c. 1271, by his
2nd wife, Eleanor de Ferrers. Jim noted, however, that Desiderée (or
Desiderata) might also be the possible child of Roger II de
Leybourne's son and heir, William de Leybourne, by his wife, Juliane,
daughter and heiress of Henry de Sandwich. Based on new research, it
appears that the latter parentage is correct.
snip
This should be very interesting as the other daughter of William and
Juliane, Idoine, became the eventual and apparent sole heir in her issue
of William de Leyburn on the death of Elizabeth de Say in 1399. So
Idoine was a co-heir. So the heirs of both the daughters of William and
Juliane should have appeared in an IPM for Elizabeth. CP (XI, 478) says
this IPM occurred in 1405 (Ch Inq. p. m. 6 Hen IV, no 21); so it will be
most interesting to see what this says. (I don't have access to the
IPMs, in case anyone wonders.)
Er, umm... The relevant IPM to examine was, of course, when the first
Leyburn line died out, that is on the death of John de Hastings, earl of
Pembroke in 1389. Unfortunately CP gives no details of this, apart
from saying that the barony devolved on the issue of Idoine, only
[sic] da. of William, lord Leyburn. If there was an IPM on the death of
John de Hastings then it should have mentioned the co-heirs to the
Leyburn lands; failing that, I wonder how those lands devolved.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: C.P. Addition: Desiderata de Leybourne, wife of Geoffrey
Dear Newsgroup ~
Since my post this morning, I've had a chance to study the account of
the Leybourne family in Complete Peerage relating to the inheritance of
Juliane de Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon.
According to C.P. 7 (1929): 639, Countess Juliane conveyed the
reversion of "all her hereditary lands" to the king in 1362. In a
footnote "b" on the same page, the author states:
"Her own manors having been given away, the inquisitions at her death
were concerned only with the estates she held for life in right of her
former husbands, but her heir de sanguine, viz., the Earl of Pembroke,
aged 20, is mentioned in one of them - that for Herts. The return for
Kent is not legible in this portion."
when her great-grandson, John de Hastings, Earl of Pembroke, died in
1389, there would have been no disposition of the Leybourne estates, as
all had been alienated to the crown in reversion by Countess Juliane
prior to her death. There were be no need to name the Leybourne heirs
in 1389, as there was nothing to inherit.
Interestingly, I note that Complete Peerage, 7 (1929): 640 identifies
John de Hastings' putative Leybourne heir in 1389 as Elizabeth, Lady
Say, the great-granddaughter of Countess Juliane de Leybourne's aunt,
Idoine de Leybourne, wife of Geoffrey de Say, 1st Lord Say. However,
if my research is correct, it would seem there was another heir with a
better claim, namely Sir Geoffrey de Lucy, of Buckinghamshire, whose
grandmother was Desiderée (de Leybourne) de Lucy, a much older sister
of Idoine (de Leybourne) de Say.
I believe Desiderée (de Leybourne) de Lucy's parentage can be proven
by an examination of the lawsuit dated 1327-8 between herself and her
niece, Countess Juliane de Leybourne, which I cited in my first post:
PRO Document, JUST 1/403/11: Special assize roll and file, Desiderata
Lucy v Juliana Leybourne, Date: 1 Edward III [1327-8] [Reference:
Online National Archives Catalog
(http://www.catalogue.nationalarchives.gov.uk/search.asp).
I suspect that it was through this lawsuit that Desiderée de Leybourne
was awarded her life interest in the three Leybourne manors she held in
1330-1. One of these manors, Winchfield, Hampshire, was part of her
mother's Sandwich inheritance.
Lastly, for those interested in heraldic seals, there is a beautiful
picture of the seal of Sir William de Leybourne, Lord Leybourne (died
1310), on Brian Timms' great website at the following web address:
http://www.briantimms.com/baronsletter/leyburn.htm
Sir William de Leybourne was the husband of Juliane de Sandwich, and
the father of Idoine (de Leybourne) de Say and probably Desiderée (de
Leybourne) de Lucy. Sir William and Juliane were also grandparents of
Juliane de Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
..
Douglas Richardson royalancestry@msn.com wrote:
Since my post this morning, I've had a chance to study the account of
the Leybourne family in Complete Peerage relating to the inheritance of
Juliane de Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon.
According to C.P. 7 (1929): 639, Countess Juliane conveyed the
reversion of "all her hereditary lands" to the king in 1362. In a
footnote "b" on the same page, the author states:
"Her own manors having been given away, the inquisitions at her death
were concerned only with the estates she held for life in right of her
former husbands, but her heir de sanguine, viz., the Earl of Pembroke,
aged 20, is mentioned in one of them - that for Herts. The return for
Kent is not legible in this portion."
From these comments, it is apparent that Countess Juliane de Leybourne
left nothing of her own inheritance for anyone to inherit. As such,
when her great-grandson, John de Hastings, Earl of Pembroke, died in
1389, there would have been no disposition of the Leybourne estates, as
all had been alienated to the crown in reversion by Countess Juliane
prior to her death. There were be no need to name the Leybourne heirs
in 1389, as there was nothing to inherit.
Interestingly, I note that Complete Peerage, 7 (1929): 640 identifies
John de Hastings' putative Leybourne heir in 1389 as Elizabeth, Lady
Say, the great-granddaughter of Countess Juliane de Leybourne's aunt,
Idoine de Leybourne, wife of Geoffrey de Say, 1st Lord Say. However,
if my research is correct, it would seem there was another heir with a
better claim, namely Sir Geoffrey de Lucy, of Buckinghamshire, whose
grandmother was Desiderée (de Leybourne) de Lucy, a much older sister
of Idoine (de Leybourne) de Say.
I believe Desiderée (de Leybourne) de Lucy's parentage can be proven
by an examination of the lawsuit dated 1327-8 between herself and her
niece, Countess Juliane de Leybourne, which I cited in my first post:
PRO Document, JUST 1/403/11: Special assize roll and file, Desiderata
Lucy v Juliana Leybourne, Date: 1 Edward III [1327-8] [Reference:
Online National Archives Catalog
(http://www.catalogue.nationalarchives.gov.uk/search.asp).
I suspect that it was through this lawsuit that Desiderée de Leybourne
was awarded her life interest in the three Leybourne manors she held in
1330-1. One of these manors, Winchfield, Hampshire, was part of her
mother's Sandwich inheritance.
Lastly, for those interested in heraldic seals, there is a beautiful
picture of the seal of Sir William de Leybourne, Lord Leybourne (died
1310), on Brian Timms' great website at the following web address:
http://www.briantimms.com/baronsletter/leyburn.htm
Sir William de Leybourne was the husband of Juliane de Sandwich, and
the father of Idoine (de Leybourne) de Say and probably Desiderée (de
Leybourne) de Lucy. Sir William and Juliane were also grandparents of
Juliane de Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
..
Douglas Richardson royalancestry@msn.com wrote:
Dear Tim ~
I think the Leybourne inheritance may be more complicated than normal.
VCH Hampshire 4 (1911): 110 indicates that Juliane de Leybourne,
Countess of Huntingdon, settled the manor of Winchfield, Hampshire on
herself in 1362-3, with reversion to the king. Following her death in
1367, King Edward III granted the manor to trustees, who in 1382
granted it to the dean and canons of the chapel or college of St.
Stephen, Westminster.
So, the manor of Winchfield was removed from the Leybourne inheritance,
and possibly others were as well. This could be why the king took an
inventory of the "issues of lands" late of Juliane Countess of
Huntingdon in 1370/1-1371/2 (see my earlier post). If the king held
the reversion to all these properties, then there would be little left
for the Leybourne heir or co-heir to inherit. This matter requires
more research.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote:
In message of 2 Aug, Tim Powys-Lybbe <tim@powys.org> wrote:
In message of 2 Aug, "Douglas Richardson royalancestry@msn.com"
royalancestry@msn.com> wrote:
Dear Newsgroup ~
In my post earlier this week, I stated that a certain Katherine de
Lucy (alias Bolour) was styled "kinswoman" [cognate] by Juliane de
Leybourne, Countess of Huntingdon. I identified Katherine de Lucy as
the daughter of Geoffrey de Lucy (died 1305), of Cublington,
Buckinghamshire, by his wife, Desiderée (or Desiderata) (probably a
Leybourne).
It appears that Katherine de Lucy was actually a grandchild of
Geoffrey and Desiderée, not their child. Countess Juliane's grant to
Katherine de Lucy took place in 1355, presumably at the time of
Katherine's marriage to Robert Bolour, Esq., of Fulbrook (in Hogshaw),
Buckinghamshire. Katherine and Robert Bolour had one son, Thomas
Boulour, Esq., who was living in 1430 [Reference: Cal. Close Rolls
1429-1435 (1933): 66]. I have not traced any descendants of the
Bolour family. If anyone knows of such, I'd appreciate hearing from
them here on the newsgroup.
I noted in my earlier post that Jim Weber's great database has
tentatively identified Desiderée (or Desiderata), wife of Geoffrey de
Lucy, as the daughter of Roger II de Leybourne, died c. 1271, by his
2nd wife, Eleanor de Ferrers. Jim noted, however, that Desiderée (or
Desiderata) might also be the possible child of Roger II de
Leybourne's son and heir, William de Leybourne, by his wife, Juliane,
daughter and heiress of Henry de Sandwich. Based on new research, it
appears that the latter parentage is correct.
snip
This should be very interesting as the other daughter of William and
Juliane, Idoine, became the eventual and apparent sole heir in her issue
of William de Leyburn on the death of Elizabeth de Say in 1399. So
Idoine was a co-heir. So the heirs of both the daughters of William and
Juliane should have appeared in an IPM for Elizabeth. CP (XI, 478) says
this IPM occurred in 1405 (Ch Inq. p. m. 6 Hen IV, no 21); so it will be
most interesting to see what this says. (I don't have access to the
IPMs, in case anyone wonders.)
Er, umm... The relevant IPM to examine was, of course, when the first
Leyburn line died out, that is on the death of John de Hastings, earl of
Pembroke in 1389. Unfortunately CP gives no details of this, apart
from saying that the barony devolved on the issue of Idoine, only
[sic] da. of William, lord Leyburn. If there was an IPM on the death of
John de Hastings then it should have mentioned the co-heirs to the
Leyburn lands; failing that, I wonder how those lands devolved.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Todd A. Farmerie
Re: C.P. Addition: Desiderata de Leybourne, wife of Geoffrey
Douglas Richardson royalancestry@msn.com wrote:
Not much better - only the senior among equals. If the relationship you
are proposing is correct, it would simply make Geoffrey and Elizabeth
coheirs (unless there was a half-sibling relationship, in which case all
bets are off).
taf
However,
if my research is correct, it would seem there was another heir with a
better claim, namely Sir Geoffrey de Lucy, of Buckinghamshire, whose
grandmother was Desiderée (de Leybourne) de Lucy, a much older sister
of Idoine (de Leybourne) de Say.
Not much better - only the senior among equals. If the relationship you
are proposing is correct, it would simply make Geoffrey and Elizabeth
coheirs (unless there was a half-sibling relationship, in which case all
bets are off).
taf
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: C.P. Addition: Desiderata de Leybourne, wife of Geoffrey
Dear Todd ~
Thank you for your good post.
It's extremely doubtful that Desiderée (de Leybourne) de Lucy was a
half-sibling to Idoine (de Leybourne) de Say. We can be virtually
certain of this as Desiderée de Lucy held the manor of Winchfield,
Hampshire in 1330-1, which property was part of their mother's Sandwich
inheritance.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Todd A. Farmerie wrote:
Thank you for your good post.
It's extremely doubtful that Desiderée (de Leybourne) de Lucy was a
half-sibling to Idoine (de Leybourne) de Say. We can be virtually
certain of this as Desiderée de Lucy held the manor of Winchfield,
Hampshire in 1330-1, which property was part of their mother's Sandwich
inheritance.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Todd A. Farmerie wrote:
Douglas Richardson royalancestry@msn.com wrote:
However,
if my research is correct, it would seem there was another heir with a
better claim, namely Sir Geoffrey de Lucy, of Buckinghamshire, whose
grandmother was Desiderée (de Leybourne) de Lucy, a much older sister
of Idoine (de Leybourne) de Say.
Not much better - only the senior among equals. If the relationship you
are proposing is correct, it would simply make Geoffrey and Elizabeth
coheirs (unless there was a half-sibling relationship, in which case all
bets are off).
taf
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: C.P. Addition: Desiderata de Leybourne, wife of Geoffrey
Dear Newsgroup ~
Complete Peerage, 7 (1929): 637 (sub Leyburn) indicates that Desiderée
de Leybourne's parents, William de Leybourne and his wife, Juliane de
Sandwich, were married before 16 October 1265.
Desiderée's husband, Geoffrey de Lucy, was born about 1 August 1268
[Reference: Cal. IPMs 2 (1906): 312-315, 433-434].
If so, then it seems virtually certain that Desiderée was the child of
William de Leybourne, by his known wife, Juliane de Sandwich. This
would make Desiderée an older sister of Idoine de Leybourne, wife of
Geoffrey de Say. This in turn would make Desiderée's grandson, Sir
Geoffrey de Lucy, the senior co-heir of the Leybourne family, on the
death of his cousin, John de Hastings, Earl of Pembroke, in 1389.
Speaking of which, the given name Desiderée is rather uncommon. Since
Desiderée appears to have been the eldest child of her parents, I
wonder if she might have been named for her paternal grandfather, Roger
de Leybourne's first wife, whose identity is unknown. Does anyone
recognize this name and can tell me if it runs in any particular
family?
The Latin form is Desiderata. Some people render this Desiderée in
the vernacular, and some people render it Desirée. Is one form
preferable to the other?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Complete Peerage, 7 (1929): 637 (sub Leyburn) indicates that Desiderée
de Leybourne's parents, William de Leybourne and his wife, Juliane de
Sandwich, were married before 16 October 1265.
Desiderée's husband, Geoffrey de Lucy, was born about 1 August 1268
[Reference: Cal. IPMs 2 (1906): 312-315, 433-434].
If so, then it seems virtually certain that Desiderée was the child of
William de Leybourne, by his known wife, Juliane de Sandwich. This
would make Desiderée an older sister of Idoine de Leybourne, wife of
Geoffrey de Say. This in turn would make Desiderée's grandson, Sir
Geoffrey de Lucy, the senior co-heir of the Leybourne family, on the
death of his cousin, John de Hastings, Earl of Pembroke, in 1389.
Speaking of which, the given name Desiderée is rather uncommon. Since
Desiderée appears to have been the eldest child of her parents, I
wonder if she might have been named for her paternal grandfather, Roger
de Leybourne's first wife, whose identity is unknown. Does anyone
recognize this name and can tell me if it runs in any particular
family?
The Latin form is Desiderata. Some people render this Desiderée in
the vernacular, and some people render it Desirée. Is one form
preferable to the other?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net