IPM relating to Nottinghamshire

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Jacques

IPM relating to Nottinghamshire

Legg inn av Jacques » 14 okt 2006 11:17:27

Hi,
I am doing some investigations on Jorz (de) Family in Notts. (Jorse, Joce)
in 1300-1400.
The Jorz were linked to the Burton,Chaworth, Deyncourt, de Nottingham ,
Wasteneys, several families in Notts.

I noted in Calendarium IPM at least 2 IPMs for Rob' Jorse N°33 in 1372 and
another one in 1376 n°71 almost 6 years! after the death of the so called
Rob.

May be, "Abstracts of the Inquisitiones Post Mortem relating to Notts" from
"Thoroton Society Record Series "could have some usefull information about
them specialy:
vol. IV (1275-1321)
vol. VI (1321-1350)
vol. XII part 1 et 2 (1350-1436)

Since their access is not easy to me, is some one could tell if these vol.
worth
to be consulted concerning Jorce (Jorz or Joce) family members?

I was looking at the general centenary index on their site but it seems very
poor.
http://www.thorotonsociety.org.uk/Thoro ... ecsect.htm

Thanks,

Jacques.

Katheryn_Swynford

Re: IPM relating to Nottinghamshire

Legg inn av Katheryn_Swynford » 16 okt 2006 23:14:04

Hi Jacques,

Sorry, I don't have any information for you, but I'd be interested iin
any Deyncourt information you would be willing to share.

Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
http://katherineswynford.blogspot.com

Jacques wrote:
Hi,
I am doing some investigations on Jorz (de) Family in Notts. (Jorse, Joce)
in 1300-1400.
The Jorz were linked to the Burton,Chaworth, Deyncourt, de Nottingham ,
Wasteneys, several families in Notts.

I noted in Calendarium IPM at least 2 IPMs for Rob' Jorse N°33 in 1372 and
another one in 1376 n°71 almost 6 years! after the death of the so called
Rob.

May be, "Abstracts of the Inquisitiones Post Mortem relating to Notts" from
"Thoroton Society Record Series "could have some usefull information about
them specialy:
vol. IV (1275-1321)
vol. VI (1321-1350)
vol. XII part 1 et 2 (1350-1436)

Since their access is not easy to me, is some one could tell if these vol.
worth
to be consulted concerning Jorce (Jorz or Joce) family members?

I was looking at the general centenary index on their site but it seems very
poor.
http://www.thorotonsociety.org.uk/Thoro ... ecsect.htm

Thanks,


Jacques.

Jacques

Re: IPM relating to Nottinghamshire

Legg inn av Jacques » 18 okt 2006 21:18:27

Hi,
In the CPR 1374-1377 p377
http://sdrc.lib.uiowa.edu/patentrolls/e ... ge0377.pdf
we have:
10 Nov. 1376 Grant to the King 's serjant Richard Lancastre of the wardship
of the manor of Birton Jorce, late of Robert Jorce (the deceased), who held
the manor by knight service of the king's ward William Deyncourt, kinsman
and heir of William Deyncourt, who held in chief , with the marriage of the
heir of the said Robert.

So we could unserstand that a daughter of Rob. Jorce has married William
Deyncourt
around 1370 or so, but it 's not clear if it is with Will. Deyncourt or
Rich. Lancaster.

Jacques.

Gjest

Re: IPM relating to Nottinghamshire

Legg inn av Gjest » 18 okt 2006 21:32:04

Jacques schrieb:

Hi,
In the CPR 1374-1377 p377
http://sdrc.lib.uiowa.edu/patentrolls/e ... ge0377.pdf
we have:
10 Nov. 1376 Grant to the King 's serjant Richard Lancastre of the wardship
of the manor of Birton Jorce, late of Robert Jorce (the deceased), who held
the manor by knight service of the king's ward William Deyncourt, kinsman
and heir of William Deyncourt, who held in chief , with the marriage of the
heir of the said Robert.

So we could unserstand that a daughter of Rob. Jorce has married William
Deyncourt
around 1370 or so, but it 's not clear if it is with Will. Deyncourt or
Rich. Lancaster.

I am not sure whether you have additional information, but what the
above Patent Roll entry actually says is that, while Robert Jorce's
heir is under the age of 21, the lands will be administered by Richard
Lancaster (i.e. he will be entitled to the profits), and he (Richard
Lancaster) will also "have the marriage" of the heir - i.e. be entitled
to marry the heir to someone. There is nothing in this entry to
suggest that Richard Lancaster married the heir himself - indeed there
is nothing in this passage that even says the heir is a daughter - and
no indication as to whom the heir was married. The only reason that
William Deincourt is named in the entry is that the wardship and
marriage of an underaged heir was the right of his feudal superior -
his Lord; the Jorce family held of the Deincourt family, so the
Deincourts would normally have had the right of wardship and marriage
of an underage Jorce heir, but William Deincourt the younger was
himself underage, and he was a ward of his Lord - the King (because he,
William, "held in chief" - i.e. directly of the King). Thus, the King
exercised the rights of wardship and marriage over the Jorce heir, and
he granted them to Richard Lancaster.

I hope to get to the Society of Genealogists tomorrow, and if so, I
will try to look at the Jorce IPMs in the Thoroton Soc. Pubs for you.

Regards, Michael

Jacques

Re: IPM relating to Nottinghamshire

Legg inn av Jacques » 18 okt 2006 22:13:02

<mjcar@btinternet.com> a écrit dans le message :
1161203524.507374.289790@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Jacques schrieb:

Hi,
In the CPR 1374-1377 p377

http://sdrc.lib.uiowa.edu/patentrolls/e ... ge0377.pdf
we have:
10 Nov. 1376 Grant to the King 's serjant Richard Lancastre of the
wardship
of the manor of Birton Jorce, late of Robert Jorce (the deceased), who
held
the manor by knight service of the king's ward William Deyncourt,
kinsman
and heir of William Deyncourt, who held in chief , with the marriage of
the
heir of the said Robert.

So we could unserstand that a daughter of Rob. Jorce has married
William
Deyncourt
around 1370 or so, but it 's not clear if it is with Will. Deyncourt or
Rich. Lancaster.

I am not sure whether you have additional information, but what the
above Patent Roll entry actually says is that, while Robert Jorce's
heir is under the age of 21, the lands will be administered by Richard
Lancaster (i.e. he will be entitled to the profits), and he (Richard
Lancaster) will also "have the marriage" of the heir - i.e. be entitled
to marry the heir to someone. There is nothing in this entry to
suggest that Richard Lancaster married the heir himself - indeed there
is nothing in this passage that even says the heir is a daughter - and
no indication as to whom the heir was married. The only reason that
William Deincourt is named in the entry is that the wardship and
marriage of an underaged heir was the right of his feudal superior -
his Lord; the Jorce family held of the Deincourt family, so the
Deincourts would normally have had the right of wardship and marriage
of an underage Jorce heir, but William Deincourt the younger was
himself underage, and he was a ward of his Lord - the King (because he,
William, "held in chief" - i.e. directly of the King). Thus, the King
exercised the rights of wardship and marriage over the Jorce heir, and
he granted them to Richard Lancaster.

I hope to get to the Society of Genealogists tomorrow, and if so, I
will try to look at the Jorce IPMs in the Thoroton Soc. Pubs for you.

Regards, Michael

Thanks to clarfiy these intricate feodal links.

I saw the Robert Jorce IPM abstract in Calendar of IPM vol 14 n° 149 p 164
(49 ED III or 1375)
It says that Robert Jorce, the deceased, was the son of John son of Robert
and Isabel.
It is said also that the manor of Burton Jorz was held by knight s' service
of John de Ridwale, who granted the services of John Jorce to will.
Deyncourt (father of the young will. Deyncourt) and John attorned to the
said Will.
accodingly.
That 's look fuzzy.
Also I understood that IPM concern only tenant in chief but it seems that it
was not the case for Rob. Jorce.
Other thing, The IPM took place 5 years! after the death of Robert Jorce (+
1370).

And another thing, there is an other IPM whose the ref. is given in the
Calendarium Inquisitionum PM sive...
concerning Rob. Jorce (is he the same?) done in 1372 saying he has no land
in Notts.
There is no notes about this IPM in the Calendar of IPM. May be in the
Thoroton Soc. Record Series VolXII
Abstract of IPM relating to Notts. (1388-1436).

Regards,
Jacques.

Katheryn_Swynford

Re: IPM relating to Nottinghamshire

Legg inn av Katheryn_Swynford » 19 okt 2006 17:16:13

Michael,

Please pardon my clumsiness as I attempt to learn as I go along:

Would the understanding of the patent roll be markedly different if,
for example, 'the marriage of the heir' was stated to be given 'for' a
named relative? (hypothetical example follows):

For example, let's say that the wardship and marriage of an underage
heir was granted to Lord Xavier for his daughter, Beatrice:

Could we reasonably assume that the underage heir was contracted to
marry Beatrice? Or that the profits of the marriage of the heir to
someone else would accrue to Beatrice or for the benefit of Beatrice?

Thanks for any infights you can share!

Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
http://katherineswynford.blogspot.com

mjcar@btinternet.com wrote:
Jacques schrieb:

Hi,
In the CPR 1374-1377 p377
http://sdrc.lib.uiowa.edu/patentrolls/e ... ge0377.pdf
we have:
10 Nov. 1376 Grant to the King 's serjant Richard Lancastre of the wardship
of the manor of Birton Jorce, late of Robert Jorce (the deceased), who held
the manor by knight service of the king's ward William Deyncourt, kinsman
and heir of William Deyncourt, who held in chief , with the marriage of the
heir of the said Robert.

So we could unserstand that a daughter of Rob. Jorce has married William
Deyncourt
around 1370 or so, but it 's not clear if it is with Will. Deyncourt or
Rich. Lancaster.

I am not sure whether you have additional information, but what the
above Patent Roll entry actually says is that, while Robert Jorce's
heir is under the age of 21, the lands will be administered by Richard
Lancaster (i.e. he will be entitled to the profits), and he (Richard
Lancaster) will also "have the marriage" of the heir - i.e. be entitled
to marry the heir to someone. There is nothing in this entry to
suggest that Richard Lancaster married the heir himself - indeed there
is nothing in this passage that even says the heir is a daughter - and
no indication as to whom the heir was married. The only reason that
William Deincourt is named in the entry is that the wardship and
marriage of an underaged heir was the right of his feudal superior -
his Lord; the Jorce family held of the Deincourt family, so the
Deincourts would normally have had the right of wardship and marriage
of an underage Jorce heir, but William Deincourt the younger was
himself underage, and he was a ward of his Lord - the King (because he,
William, "held in chief" - i.e. directly of the King). Thus, the King
exercised the rights of wardship and marriage over the Jorce heir, and
he granted them to Richard Lancaster.

I hope to get to the Society of Genealogists tomorrow, and if so, I
will try to look at the Jorce IPMs in the Thoroton Soc. Pubs for you.

Regards, Michael

Gjest

Re: IPM relating to Nottinghamshire

Legg inn av Gjest » 19 okt 2006 22:44:18

Jacques schrieb:

Hi,
I am doing some investigations on Jorz (de) Family in Notts. (Jorse, Joce)
in 1300-1400.
The Jorz were linked to the Burton,Chaworth, Deyncourt, de Nottingham ,
Wasteneys, several families in Notts.

I noted in Calendarium IPM at least 2 IPMs for Rob' Jorse N°33 in 1372 and
another one in 1376 n°71 almost 6 years! after the death of the so called
Rob.

May be, "Abstracts of the Inquisitiones Post Mortem relating to Notts" from
"Thoroton Society Record Series "could have some usefull information about
them specialy:
vol. IV (1275-1321)
vol. VI (1321-1350)
vol. XII part 1 et 2 (1350-1436)

Jacques

I had a look at these three volumes today. The only Jorce IPMs in them
are the two you have already noted. These read as follows:

Thoroton Society Publication XII: [Notts] IPMs 1350-1436:

p 66: Robert Jorce: writ dated 13 February 1370/1

Inquest at Nottingham, 7 June 1371; he held no land or tenements of the
King in chief in the said county. He died 9 July 1369 (sic).

p 68: Robert Jorce, knight: writ dated 11 November 1375

(very large panel of jurors): Inquest at Retford, 17 December 1375: the
jurors say his grandfather Robert Jorce, knight, was seized in his
desmesnes of the fee of the manor of Burton Jorce and 20 acres of land
in Gedlyng etc; he [the grandfather] gave and granted the aforesaid
manor and land at Burton Jorce to Robert Jorce of Gedlyng [i.e. a third
man of that name] and others in fee simple - they granted the same to
the aforesaid Robert Jorce [the grandfather] and Isabel his wife; after
their death the estate passed to their son and heir, John Jorce, and
after his death it passed to his son and heir Robert [the deceased].
His son and heir William is aged nine. The aforesaid manor was held of
John de Ridwale of Bulcote, who granted the service of John the father
of the deceased to William Deincourt, knight, and his heirs for ever;
on his [William's] death, it descended to William Deincourt his son, a
minor in the King's ward. Robert the son of John Jorce held 20 acres
of land in Gedlyng of Adam de Everyngham of Laxton by knight service,
and land called Gathous (being the gate of the manor of Burton Jorce)
of the Earl of Warwick by the service of a pound of pepper annually.
Robert the son of John Jorce died 25 July 1369 (sic); Richard Jorce
occupied the said manor after his death and does so still and takes the
issues [i.e. income]; the said manor is worth 18 marks per year, the 20
acres at Gedlyng one half a mark annually, and the acre at Burton Jorce
12 pence a year.

MA-R

Jacques

Re: IPM relating to Nottinghamshire

Legg inn av Jacques » 20 okt 2006 09:50:13

<mjcar@btinternet.com> a écrit dans le message :
1161294258.474256.274060@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

So, the 2 IPMs, 1st in 1370 and 2nd in 1375, concern the same person Robert
Jorce died in july 1369.
It looks like the king Edward III administration has been completly
misleaded once but not a second time.
I think Rob. de Jorce (Jorz, Jort) died probably abroad. That's could
explain why the administration made a such mistake.
Also when you look at the visitation done in pays d'auge (Normandy) done in
1666, you find a genealogy of a Jort family starting with a Robert de Jorz
married in1348 with Anne de Soublecau (Soubliaco?), he has a son John
married in 1380 with Jeanne Dacon (Dacres?).
I think it could be an interesting case of anglo-normand family move during
the 100 years war to study.

Regards,
Jacques.

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»