Complete Peerage Addition: Iseult de Sulney, mother of Sir E
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Douglas Richardson
Complete Peerage Addition: Iseult de Sulney, mother of Sir E
Dear Newsgroup ~
The authoritative Complete Peerage, 4 (1916): 93-96 (sub Daubeney) has
a good account of the life and ancestry of Sir Ellis (or Elias)
d'Aubeney, Lord Daubeney (died 1305), of South Ingleby, Lincolnshire,
South Petherton, Somerset, etc., seigneur of Landal in Brittany.
Complete Peerage identifies Lord Daubeney's parents as Sir Ralph
d'Aubeney (died 1292), of South Ingleby, Lincolnshire, South Petherton,
Barrington, and Chillington, Somerset, etc., seigneur of Landal in
Brittany, and his wife, Isabel (living 1294), which Isabel is of
unknown parentage.
Recently I came acrioss an abstract of a lawsuit dated Easter term
1295, between Sir Elias d'Aubeney and John de Wilington, regarding
various lands in Lantegulos, Ussa et Fawinton', Cornwall, formerly held
by Andrew de Sulney, late kinsman [consanguineus] of Sir Elias
d'Aubeney. Sir Elias's exact kinship to Andrew de Sulney is set forth
in the lawsuit. Elias' mother, Iseult (or Isolde), is stated to be the
daughter and heiress of Joldewyn [de Sulney], which Joldeyn was the son
and heir of John [de Sulney], brother of Ralph [de Sulney], father of
Andrew de Sulney.
Thus it would appear that Sir Elias d'Aubeney's mother was Iseult (or
Isolde) de Sulney, daughter and heiress of Joldewyn de Sulney. Iseult
(or Isolde) de Sulney was evidently the first wife of Sir Ralph
d'Aubeney, as Sir Ralph is known to have been survived at his death by
a [2nd] wife, Isabel, as stated by Complete Peerage.
For interest's sake, the following is a list of the 17th Century New
World colonists who descend from Sir Elias d'Aubeney, Lord Daubeney:
Dorothy Beresford, Charles Calvert, Anne Humphrey, John Nelson, Herbert
Pelham, Edward Raynsford, Mary Johanna Somerset, John Stockman, John
West, Margaret Wyatt.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + + +
ABSTRACT OF LAWSUIT DATED EASTER 1295
Source:
http://www.sd-editions.com/AnaServer?PR ... tframe.anv
Cornub'. Elyas de Albiniaco per attornatum suum petit versus Johannem
de Wyllynton' duo mesuagia, centum quaterviginti et quinque acras
terre, quaterviginti et duas acras bosci, centum acras more, decem
libratas, undecim solidatas et septem denariatas redditus et redditum
unius ovis matricis, unius agni, unius hoggastry, unius libre cumini,
unius paris calcarium deauratorum, duorum parium cirotecarum,
percussionis ferramenti unius caruce et medietatem unius acre prati cum
pertinenciis in Lantegulos, Ussa et Fawinton' de quibus Andreas de
Sulny, consangineus predicti Elie, cujus heres ipse est, fuit seisitus
in dominico suo ut de feodo die quo obiit etc. Et unde dicit quod
predictus Andreas, consanguineus etc., fuit seisitus de predictis
tenementis cum pertinenciis in dominico suo ut de feodo tempore pacis
tempore domini \Henrici regis, patris domini/ regis nunc, capiendo inde
explecia ad valenciam etc. et inde obiit seisitus etc. Et de ipso
Andrea, quia obiit sine herede de se, resorciebatur feodum etc. cuidam
Johanni ut avunculo et heredi, fratri cujusdam Radulphi, patris ipsius
Andree; et de ipso Johanne descendit feodum etc. cuidam Joldewyno ut
filio et heredi etc.; et de ipso Joldewyno cuidam Isolde ut filie et
heredi; et de ipsa Isolda cuidam Philippo ut filio et heredi; et de
ipso Philippo, quia obiit sine herede de se, descendit feodum etc. isti
Elye qui nunc petit ut fratri et heredi. Et inde producit sectam etc.
Et Johannes per attornatum suum venit. Et dicit quod non debet ei inde
respondere quia dicit quod, cum predictus Elyas asserit feodum etc.
predictorum tenementorum resortiri de predicto Andrea, de cujus seisina
etc., predicto Johanni ut avunculo et heredi, fratri predicti Radulphi
patris etc., idem Radulphus nuncquam aliquem fratrem habuit, Johannem
nomine, heredem ipsius Andree, natum sive nutritum, visum aut cognitum
infra quatuor maria Anglie. Et de hoc ponit se super patriam; unde
petit judicium etc.
Et Elyas dicit quod ipse clamat predicta tenementa ut illa de quibus
predictus Andreas, consanguineus etc., obiit seisitus in dominico suo
ut de feodo et que predictus Johannes modo tenet, narrando quod de ipso
Andrea resorciebatur feodum etc. predicto Johanni ut avunculo et heredi
etc. simpliciter absque aliqua adjeccione, quem quidem resortum paratus
est verificare sicut curia consideraverit; unde cum de responsione per
predictum Johannem facta diversi possunt elici intellectus et sic
excepcio sua videtur ambigua, duplex et incerta, petit judicium si
excepcio illa in forma qua eam pretendit sit admittenda etc.
Et Johannes, ut prius, dicit quod predictus Radulphus pater etc.
nuncquam habuit aliquem fratrem, Johannem nomine, qui visus fuit, natus
aut nutritus infra quatuor maria Anglie vel qui heres predicti Andree,
de cujus seisina etc., tentus fuit aut cognitus nec eciam predictus
Joldewynus, cui predictus Elyas dicit feodum predicti tenementi
descendisse ut filio et heredi, visus fuit etc., nutritus aut cognitus.
Et hoc paratus est verificare per patriam; unde, desicut curia ista in
hujusmodi casu ulterius non potest nec debet responsionem sive
excepcionem aliquam admittere quam illam de qua rei veritas per ipsam
curiam poterit inquiri seu cognosci petit judicium etc. Et, si hoc non
sufficit, dicet aliud.
Dies datus est eis de audiendo judicio suo hic a die sancti Michaelis
in tres septimanas etc."
The authoritative Complete Peerage, 4 (1916): 93-96 (sub Daubeney) has
a good account of the life and ancestry of Sir Ellis (or Elias)
d'Aubeney, Lord Daubeney (died 1305), of South Ingleby, Lincolnshire,
South Petherton, Somerset, etc., seigneur of Landal in Brittany.
Complete Peerage identifies Lord Daubeney's parents as Sir Ralph
d'Aubeney (died 1292), of South Ingleby, Lincolnshire, South Petherton,
Barrington, and Chillington, Somerset, etc., seigneur of Landal in
Brittany, and his wife, Isabel (living 1294), which Isabel is of
unknown parentage.
Recently I came acrioss an abstract of a lawsuit dated Easter term
1295, between Sir Elias d'Aubeney and John de Wilington, regarding
various lands in Lantegulos, Ussa et Fawinton', Cornwall, formerly held
by Andrew de Sulney, late kinsman [consanguineus] of Sir Elias
d'Aubeney. Sir Elias's exact kinship to Andrew de Sulney is set forth
in the lawsuit. Elias' mother, Iseult (or Isolde), is stated to be the
daughter and heiress of Joldewyn [de Sulney], which Joldeyn was the son
and heir of John [de Sulney], brother of Ralph [de Sulney], father of
Andrew de Sulney.
Thus it would appear that Sir Elias d'Aubeney's mother was Iseult (or
Isolde) de Sulney, daughter and heiress of Joldewyn de Sulney. Iseult
(or Isolde) de Sulney was evidently the first wife of Sir Ralph
d'Aubeney, as Sir Ralph is known to have been survived at his death by
a [2nd] wife, Isabel, as stated by Complete Peerage.
For interest's sake, the following is a list of the 17th Century New
World colonists who descend from Sir Elias d'Aubeney, Lord Daubeney:
Dorothy Beresford, Charles Calvert, Anne Humphrey, John Nelson, Herbert
Pelham, Edward Raynsford, Mary Johanna Somerset, John Stockman, John
West, Margaret Wyatt.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + + +
ABSTRACT OF LAWSUIT DATED EASTER 1295
Source:
http://www.sd-editions.com/AnaServer?PR ... tframe.anv
Cornub'. Elyas de Albiniaco per attornatum suum petit versus Johannem
de Wyllynton' duo mesuagia, centum quaterviginti et quinque acras
terre, quaterviginti et duas acras bosci, centum acras more, decem
libratas, undecim solidatas et septem denariatas redditus et redditum
unius ovis matricis, unius agni, unius hoggastry, unius libre cumini,
unius paris calcarium deauratorum, duorum parium cirotecarum,
percussionis ferramenti unius caruce et medietatem unius acre prati cum
pertinenciis in Lantegulos, Ussa et Fawinton' de quibus Andreas de
Sulny, consangineus predicti Elie, cujus heres ipse est, fuit seisitus
in dominico suo ut de feodo die quo obiit etc. Et unde dicit quod
predictus Andreas, consanguineus etc., fuit seisitus de predictis
tenementis cum pertinenciis in dominico suo ut de feodo tempore pacis
tempore domini \Henrici regis, patris domini/ regis nunc, capiendo inde
explecia ad valenciam etc. et inde obiit seisitus etc. Et de ipso
Andrea, quia obiit sine herede de se, resorciebatur feodum etc. cuidam
Johanni ut avunculo et heredi, fratri cujusdam Radulphi, patris ipsius
Andree; et de ipso Johanne descendit feodum etc. cuidam Joldewyno ut
filio et heredi etc.; et de ipso Joldewyno cuidam Isolde ut filie et
heredi; et de ipsa Isolda cuidam Philippo ut filio et heredi; et de
ipso Philippo, quia obiit sine herede de se, descendit feodum etc. isti
Elye qui nunc petit ut fratri et heredi. Et inde producit sectam etc.
Et Johannes per attornatum suum venit. Et dicit quod non debet ei inde
respondere quia dicit quod, cum predictus Elyas asserit feodum etc.
predictorum tenementorum resortiri de predicto Andrea, de cujus seisina
etc., predicto Johanni ut avunculo et heredi, fratri predicti Radulphi
patris etc., idem Radulphus nuncquam aliquem fratrem habuit, Johannem
nomine, heredem ipsius Andree, natum sive nutritum, visum aut cognitum
infra quatuor maria Anglie. Et de hoc ponit se super patriam; unde
petit judicium etc.
Et Elyas dicit quod ipse clamat predicta tenementa ut illa de quibus
predictus Andreas, consanguineus etc., obiit seisitus in dominico suo
ut de feodo et que predictus Johannes modo tenet, narrando quod de ipso
Andrea resorciebatur feodum etc. predicto Johanni ut avunculo et heredi
etc. simpliciter absque aliqua adjeccione, quem quidem resortum paratus
est verificare sicut curia consideraverit; unde cum de responsione per
predictum Johannem facta diversi possunt elici intellectus et sic
excepcio sua videtur ambigua, duplex et incerta, petit judicium si
excepcio illa in forma qua eam pretendit sit admittenda etc.
Et Johannes, ut prius, dicit quod predictus Radulphus pater etc.
nuncquam habuit aliquem fratrem, Johannem nomine, qui visus fuit, natus
aut nutritus infra quatuor maria Anglie vel qui heres predicti Andree,
de cujus seisina etc., tentus fuit aut cognitus nec eciam predictus
Joldewynus, cui predictus Elyas dicit feodum predicti tenementi
descendisse ut filio et heredi, visus fuit etc., nutritus aut cognitus.
Et hoc paratus est verificare per patriam; unde, desicut curia ista in
hujusmodi casu ulterius non potest nec debet responsionem sive
excepcionem aliquam admittere quam illam de qua rei veritas per ipsam
curiam poterit inquiri seu cognosci petit judicium etc. Et, si hoc non
sufficit, dicet aliud.
Dies datus est eis de audiendo judicio suo hic a die sancti Michaelis
in tres septimanas etc."
-
Douglas Richardson
[Revised Post] Complete Peerage Addition: Iseult de Sulney,
Dear Newsgroup ~
The authoritative Complete Peerage, 4 (1916): 93-96 (sub Daubeney) has
a good account of the life and ancestry of Sir Ellis (or Elias)
d'Aubeney, Lord Daubeney (died 1305), of South Ingleby, Lincolnshire,
South Petherton, Somerset, etc., seigneur of Landal in Brittany.
Complete Peerage identifies Lord Daubeney's parents as Sir Ralph
d'Aubeney (died 1292), of South Ingleby, Lincolnshire, South Petherton,
Barrington, and Chillington, Somerset, etc., seigneur of Landal in
Brittany, and his wife, Isabel (living 1294), which Isabel is of
unknown parentage.
Recently I came acrioss an abstract of a lawsuit dated Easter term
1295, between Sir Elias d'Aubeney and John de Wilington, regarding
various lands in Lanteglos, Husse, and Fawton, Cornwall, formerly held
by Andrew de Sulney, late kinsman [consanguineus] of Sir Elias
d'Aubeney. Sir Elias's exact kinship to Andrew de Sulney is set forth
in the lawsuit. Elias' mother, Iseult (or Isolde), is stated to be the
daughter and heiress of Joldewyn [de Sulney], which Joldeyn was the son
and heir of John [de Sulney], brother of Ralph [de Sulney], father of
Andrew de Sulney.
Thus it would appear that Sir Elias d'Aubeney's mother was Iseult (or
Isolde) de Sulney, daughter and heiress of Joldewyn de Sulney. Iseult
(or Isolde) de Sulney was evidently the first wife of Sir Ralph
d'Aubeney, and the mother of his three sons, Philip, Knt., William, and
Ellis (or Elias), Knt. As indicated by Complete Peerage, Sir Ralph
d'Aubeney was survived at his death by a wife named Isabel. Iseult can
not be the same person as Isabel, as the 1295 lawsuit indicates that
Iseult predeceased her elder son, Philip d'Aubeney, whereas Isabel, the
surviving wife of Ralph, was still living at Philip's death in 1294.
Philip's heir in 1294 was his younger brother, Ellis d'Aubeney, the
plaintiff in the 1295 lawsuit.
Elsewhere I find that Excerpta e Rotulis Finium, vol. II (1836): 320
indicates that Andrew de Sulney [Sulleny] died before 7 January 1260.
For interest's sake, the following is a list of the 17th Century New
World colonists who descend from Sir Elias d'Aubeney, Lord Daubeney:
Dorothy Beresford, Charles Calvert, Anne Humphrey, John Nelson, Herbert
Pelham, Edward Raynsford, Mary Johanna Somerset (two descents), John
Stockman, John West, Margaret Wyatt, George Yate.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + + +
ABSTRACT OF LAWSUIT DATED EASTER 1295
Source:
http://www.sd-editions.com/AnaServer?PR ... tframe.anv
Cornwall. Ellis d'Albigny through his attorney makes claim against John
of Willington to two messuages, one hundred and eight five acres of
arable, eighty-two acres of wood, one hundred acres of moorland, ten
pounds, eleven shillings and seven pence rent and the rent of one ewe,
one lamb and one hoggaster, one pound of cumin and one pair of gilt
spurs, two pairs of gloves, the casting of the ironwork of one plough
and to the moiety of an acre of meadow with appurtenances in Lanteglos,
Husse and Fawton of which Andrew de Sulny, the kinsman of the said
Ellis, whose heir he is, was seised in his demesne as of fee on the day
he died etc. He says that the said Andrew, his kinsman, was seised of
the said tenements with appurtenances in his demesne as of fee in time
of peace, in the reign of the lord king Henry, the father of the
present king, receiving from them income to the value etc. and died
seised of them etc. From the same Andrew, because he had died without
an heir of his body, the fee etc. resorted to one John as uncle and
heir, the brother of one Ralph the father of the same Andrew; and from
the same John the fee etc. descended to one Joldewyn as son and heir
etc.; and from the same Joldewyn to one Isolda as daughter and heir;
and from the same Isolda to one Philip as son and heir; and from the
same Philip, because he died without an heir of his body, the fee etc.
descended to this Ellis, who is now claiming, as brother and heir. He
produces suit in support of this etc.
John appears through his attorney. He says that he is not obliged to
answer him on this because, whereas the said Ellis asserts the fee etc.
of the said tenements resorted from the said Andrew, on whose seisin
etc., to the said John as uncle and heir, the brother of the said
Ralph, the father etc., the same Ralph never had any brother named
John, the heir of the same Andrew, born or raised, seen or known within
the four seas of England. He puts himself on this on a jury and so asks
for judgment etc.
Ellis says that he claims the said tenements as those of which his
kinsman Andrew etc. died seised in his demesne as of fee and which the
said John now holds, counting that from the same Andrew the fee etc.
resorted to the said John as uncle and heir etc. simply and without any
qualification, which resort he is ready to prove as the court should
adjudge and since various interpretations can be put on the response
made by John and thus his response seems ambiguous, double and
uncertain he asks for judgment whether the exception in the form in
which he offers it is admissible etc.
John says, as before, that the said Ralph the father etc. never had any
brother named John who was seen, born or raised within the four seas of
England or who was held or known as the heir of the said Andrew, on
whose seisin etc., nor was the said Joldewyn, to whom the said Ellis
says the fee of the said tenement descended as son and heir, seen etc.,
raised or known. He is ready to prove this by the jury. Since this
court in such a case neither can nor ought admit any response or
exception than that of which the truth can be discovered or known by
that court he asks for judgment etc. If this does not suffice he will
say something else.
They are adjourned to hear their judgment here three weeks after
Michaelmas etc.
The authoritative Complete Peerage, 4 (1916): 93-96 (sub Daubeney) has
a good account of the life and ancestry of Sir Ellis (or Elias)
d'Aubeney, Lord Daubeney (died 1305), of South Ingleby, Lincolnshire,
South Petherton, Somerset, etc., seigneur of Landal in Brittany.
Complete Peerage identifies Lord Daubeney's parents as Sir Ralph
d'Aubeney (died 1292), of South Ingleby, Lincolnshire, South Petherton,
Barrington, and Chillington, Somerset, etc., seigneur of Landal in
Brittany, and his wife, Isabel (living 1294), which Isabel is of
unknown parentage.
Recently I came acrioss an abstract of a lawsuit dated Easter term
1295, between Sir Elias d'Aubeney and John de Wilington, regarding
various lands in Lanteglos, Husse, and Fawton, Cornwall, formerly held
by Andrew de Sulney, late kinsman [consanguineus] of Sir Elias
d'Aubeney. Sir Elias's exact kinship to Andrew de Sulney is set forth
in the lawsuit. Elias' mother, Iseult (or Isolde), is stated to be the
daughter and heiress of Joldewyn [de Sulney], which Joldeyn was the son
and heir of John [de Sulney], brother of Ralph [de Sulney], father of
Andrew de Sulney.
Thus it would appear that Sir Elias d'Aubeney's mother was Iseult (or
Isolde) de Sulney, daughter and heiress of Joldewyn de Sulney. Iseult
(or Isolde) de Sulney was evidently the first wife of Sir Ralph
d'Aubeney, and the mother of his three sons, Philip, Knt., William, and
Ellis (or Elias), Knt. As indicated by Complete Peerage, Sir Ralph
d'Aubeney was survived at his death by a wife named Isabel. Iseult can
not be the same person as Isabel, as the 1295 lawsuit indicates that
Iseult predeceased her elder son, Philip d'Aubeney, whereas Isabel, the
surviving wife of Ralph, was still living at Philip's death in 1294.
Philip's heir in 1294 was his younger brother, Ellis d'Aubeney, the
plaintiff in the 1295 lawsuit.
Elsewhere I find that Excerpta e Rotulis Finium, vol. II (1836): 320
indicates that Andrew de Sulney [Sulleny] died before 7 January 1260.
For interest's sake, the following is a list of the 17th Century New
World colonists who descend from Sir Elias d'Aubeney, Lord Daubeney:
Dorothy Beresford, Charles Calvert, Anne Humphrey, John Nelson, Herbert
Pelham, Edward Raynsford, Mary Johanna Somerset (two descents), John
Stockman, John West, Margaret Wyatt, George Yate.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + + +
ABSTRACT OF LAWSUIT DATED EASTER 1295
Source:
http://www.sd-editions.com/AnaServer?PR ... tframe.anv
Cornwall. Ellis d'Albigny through his attorney makes claim against John
of Willington to two messuages, one hundred and eight five acres of
arable, eighty-two acres of wood, one hundred acres of moorland, ten
pounds, eleven shillings and seven pence rent and the rent of one ewe,
one lamb and one hoggaster, one pound of cumin and one pair of gilt
spurs, two pairs of gloves, the casting of the ironwork of one plough
and to the moiety of an acre of meadow with appurtenances in Lanteglos,
Husse and Fawton of which Andrew de Sulny, the kinsman of the said
Ellis, whose heir he is, was seised in his demesne as of fee on the day
he died etc. He says that the said Andrew, his kinsman, was seised of
the said tenements with appurtenances in his demesne as of fee in time
of peace, in the reign of the lord king Henry, the father of the
present king, receiving from them income to the value etc. and died
seised of them etc. From the same Andrew, because he had died without
an heir of his body, the fee etc. resorted to one John as uncle and
heir, the brother of one Ralph the father of the same Andrew; and from
the same John the fee etc. descended to one Joldewyn as son and heir
etc.; and from the same Joldewyn to one Isolda as daughter and heir;
and from the same Isolda to one Philip as son and heir; and from the
same Philip, because he died without an heir of his body, the fee etc.
descended to this Ellis, who is now claiming, as brother and heir. He
produces suit in support of this etc.
John appears through his attorney. He says that he is not obliged to
answer him on this because, whereas the said Ellis asserts the fee etc.
of the said tenements resorted from the said Andrew, on whose seisin
etc., to the said John as uncle and heir, the brother of the said
Ralph, the father etc., the same Ralph never had any brother named
John, the heir of the same Andrew, born or raised, seen or known within
the four seas of England. He puts himself on this on a jury and so asks
for judgment etc.
Ellis says that he claims the said tenements as those of which his
kinsman Andrew etc. died seised in his demesne as of fee and which the
said John now holds, counting that from the same Andrew the fee etc.
resorted to the said John as uncle and heir etc. simply and without any
qualification, which resort he is ready to prove as the court should
adjudge and since various interpretations can be put on the response
made by John and thus his response seems ambiguous, double and
uncertain he asks for judgment whether the exception in the form in
which he offers it is admissible etc.
John says, as before, that the said Ralph the father etc. never had any
brother named John who was seen, born or raised within the four seas of
England or who was held or known as the heir of the said Andrew, on
whose seisin etc., nor was the said Joldewyn, to whom the said Ellis
says the fee of the said tenement descended as son and heir, seen etc.,
raised or known. He is ready to prove this by the jury. Since this
court in such a case neither can nor ought admit any response or
exception than that of which the truth can be discovered or known by
that court he asks for judgment etc. If this does not suffice he will
say something else.
They are adjourned to hear their judgment here three weeks after
Michaelmas etc.
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Complete Peerage Addition: Iseult de Dol, mother of Sir
Dear Newsgroup ~
Since making my original post on the identity of Iseult, first wife of
Sir Ralph d'Aubeney, seigneur of Landal in Brittany, I've located
several contemporary records which trace Iseult's ancestry back in
time. These records confirm the statements made by Iseult's son, Elias
d'Aubeney, in his 1295 lawsuit in England, namely that Iseult's father,
[Sir] Gedouin [de Dol], was the son of John [de Dol], which John de Dol
was the [elder] brother of Ralph de Soligny (or Sulney), of England.
As time permits, I'll post various records concerning the Dol and
Soligny families which prove these connections. For starters, I've
posted below two items which concern Sir Elias d'Aubeney's maternal
grandfather, Sir Gedouin de Dol, knight, who died testate c. 1235. Sir
Gedouin de Dol was the son and heir apparent of Jean de Dol, seigneur
of Combourg. In the first document below, Sir Gedouin de Dol confirms
the gifts which Alan Fitz Jordan Seneschal of Dol formerly made to
Tronchet Abbey in Brittany. This document is dated 1229. In the
second document dated 1235, Gedouin's father, Jean de Dol, gives
various particulars regarding the testament of his son, Gedouin, of
which he and others were executors. Specific mention is made of
Gedouin de Dol's wife, Eleanor de Vitré, and her brother, André de
Vitré.
Eleanor de Vitré named here as wife of Sir Gedouin de Dol was the
niece of the better known Eleanor de Vitré, Countess of Salisbury in
England, ancestress of the baronial Longespée family. Iseult de Dol's
mother, Eleanor de Vitré, was likewise the niece of Robert de Vitré,
Precentor of Paris, which individual was styled kinsman by the ill
fated Duke Arthur of Brittany in 1199.
A word of explanation: The records I've found indicate that Sir Elias
d'Aubeney's maternal grandfather and great-grandfather were both known
as "de Dol;" however, the great-grandfather in this line was Hasculf de
Soligny. To confuse matters, Hasculf de Soligny's younger sons, Ralph
and Geoffrey, both went to England and used the Soligny surname.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + + + + +
Source: Dom Hyacinthe Morice, Memoirs pour Servir de Preuves à
l'Histoire ecclesiastique et civile de Bretagne, volume 1 (1742).
pg. 864-865. Date: 1229.
Lettre de Gedouin de Dol pour le Tronchet.
Universis praesentes litteras inspecturis & audituris Jodoinus de Dolo
miles, salutem in Domino. Noveritis quod ego pro salute animae meae
omnes eleemosynas & donationes quas Alanus filius Jordani Senescallus
Dolensis fundator beatae Mariae de Tronchero & antecessores mei & omnes
alii fideles fecerunt dictae Abbatiae & fratribus ibidem Deo
servientibus & servituris ratas habeo & confirmo, volens & concedens
quod easdem habeant, teneant & possideant in perpetuum liberas,
pacificas & quietas nihil mihi juris retinens in eisdem. In quorum
testimonium praesentes litteras dedi eisdem sigillo meo sigillatas.
Datum anno Domini 1229, mense Aprilis. Titre de Tronchet.
+ + + + + + + + +
pp. 884-885. Date: 1235.
Testament de Jedoin de Dol fils de Jean, Seigneur de Combourg.
Universis Joannes de Dolo Dominus Comburnii Sal. Jodoinus filius meus
primogenitus laborans in extremis pro salute anime sue voluit &
disposuit unam capellaniam fieri in Abbatia Vet. v. & rogavit me,
Dominum Robertum Chesnel, & Dominum Willelmum Goscelin milites &
fratrem Herbertum de Veteri villa quos testamenti sui fecit executores,
quod nos de redditibus suis provideremus & assignaremus unde dicta
Capellania posset fieri competenter. Nos vero dispositioni & voluntati
ejus annuentes cum assensu & voluntate Andree Domini Vitreii & Alienor
sororis sue uxoris dicti Jodoini providimus & assignavimus quod dicta
Capella fieret de redditibus quos Monachi dicte Abbatiae solebant dicto
Jodoino reddere annuatim de terris suis sitis in parrochia de Paluel in
nostro feodo, & propter hoc eisdem Monachis donavimus & quittavimus
omnes redditus terrarum illarum. Hanc donationem & quittationem volui,
feci, & concessi tanquam pater dicti Jodoini & executor testamenti
ejus, supradictis aliis executoribus suis volentibus, facientibus, &
concedentibus idipsum. Quod ut ratam in posterum habeatur ego & ipsi
presentibus litteris sigilla nostra apposuimus in testimonium &
munimem. Actum anno gratie MCCXXXV. Titre de la Vieuville.
Il ne reste que le sceau de Guillaume Goscelin qui porte orlé à trois
billettes ou ermines. 2. 1.
Since making my original post on the identity of Iseult, first wife of
Sir Ralph d'Aubeney, seigneur of Landal in Brittany, I've located
several contemporary records which trace Iseult's ancestry back in
time. These records confirm the statements made by Iseult's son, Elias
d'Aubeney, in his 1295 lawsuit in England, namely that Iseult's father,
[Sir] Gedouin [de Dol], was the son of John [de Dol], which John de Dol
was the [elder] brother of Ralph de Soligny (or Sulney), of England.
As time permits, I'll post various records concerning the Dol and
Soligny families which prove these connections. For starters, I've
posted below two items which concern Sir Elias d'Aubeney's maternal
grandfather, Sir Gedouin de Dol, knight, who died testate c. 1235. Sir
Gedouin de Dol was the son and heir apparent of Jean de Dol, seigneur
of Combourg. In the first document below, Sir Gedouin de Dol confirms
the gifts which Alan Fitz Jordan Seneschal of Dol formerly made to
Tronchet Abbey in Brittany. This document is dated 1229. In the
second document dated 1235, Gedouin's father, Jean de Dol, gives
various particulars regarding the testament of his son, Gedouin, of
which he and others were executors. Specific mention is made of
Gedouin de Dol's wife, Eleanor de Vitré, and her brother, André de
Vitré.
Eleanor de Vitré named here as wife of Sir Gedouin de Dol was the
niece of the better known Eleanor de Vitré, Countess of Salisbury in
England, ancestress of the baronial Longespée family. Iseult de Dol's
mother, Eleanor de Vitré, was likewise the niece of Robert de Vitré,
Precentor of Paris, which individual was styled kinsman by the ill
fated Duke Arthur of Brittany in 1199.
A word of explanation: The records I've found indicate that Sir Elias
d'Aubeney's maternal grandfather and great-grandfather were both known
as "de Dol;" however, the great-grandfather in this line was Hasculf de
Soligny. To confuse matters, Hasculf de Soligny's younger sons, Ralph
and Geoffrey, both went to England and used the Soligny surname.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + + + + +
Source: Dom Hyacinthe Morice, Memoirs pour Servir de Preuves à
l'Histoire ecclesiastique et civile de Bretagne, volume 1 (1742).
pg. 864-865. Date: 1229.
Lettre de Gedouin de Dol pour le Tronchet.
Universis praesentes litteras inspecturis & audituris Jodoinus de Dolo
miles, salutem in Domino. Noveritis quod ego pro salute animae meae
omnes eleemosynas & donationes quas Alanus filius Jordani Senescallus
Dolensis fundator beatae Mariae de Tronchero & antecessores mei & omnes
alii fideles fecerunt dictae Abbatiae & fratribus ibidem Deo
servientibus & servituris ratas habeo & confirmo, volens & concedens
quod easdem habeant, teneant & possideant in perpetuum liberas,
pacificas & quietas nihil mihi juris retinens in eisdem. In quorum
testimonium praesentes litteras dedi eisdem sigillo meo sigillatas.
Datum anno Domini 1229, mense Aprilis. Titre de Tronchet.
+ + + + + + + + +
pp. 884-885. Date: 1235.
Testament de Jedoin de Dol fils de Jean, Seigneur de Combourg.
Universis Joannes de Dolo Dominus Comburnii Sal. Jodoinus filius meus
primogenitus laborans in extremis pro salute anime sue voluit &
disposuit unam capellaniam fieri in Abbatia Vet. v. & rogavit me,
Dominum Robertum Chesnel, & Dominum Willelmum Goscelin milites &
fratrem Herbertum de Veteri villa quos testamenti sui fecit executores,
quod nos de redditibus suis provideremus & assignaremus unde dicta
Capellania posset fieri competenter. Nos vero dispositioni & voluntati
ejus annuentes cum assensu & voluntate Andree Domini Vitreii & Alienor
sororis sue uxoris dicti Jodoini providimus & assignavimus quod dicta
Capella fieret de redditibus quos Monachi dicte Abbatiae solebant dicto
Jodoino reddere annuatim de terris suis sitis in parrochia de Paluel in
nostro feodo, & propter hoc eisdem Monachis donavimus & quittavimus
omnes redditus terrarum illarum. Hanc donationem & quittationem volui,
feci, & concessi tanquam pater dicti Jodoini & executor testamenti
ejus, supradictis aliis executoribus suis volentibus, facientibus, &
concedentibus idipsum. Quod ut ratam in posterum habeatur ego & ipsi
presentibus litteris sigilla nostra apposuimus in testimonium &
munimem. Actum anno gratie MCCXXXV. Titre de la Vieuville.
Il ne reste que le sceau de Guillaume Goscelin qui porte orlé à trois
billettes ou ermines. 2. 1.
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Complete Peerage Addition: Iseult de Dol, mother of Sir
Dear Newsgroup ~
This is the next in a series of posts which document the newly
discovered Breton ancestry of Sir Elias d'Aubeney (died 1305), Lord
Daubeney in England.
In the previous post, we found that Sir Elias d'Aubeney's mother,
Iseult de Dol, was the daughter of Sir Gedouin de Dol, knight, died c.
1235, and his wife, Eleanor de Vitré, sister of Andre de Vitré. Sir
Geldouin de Dol in turn was found to be the son of Jean de Dol,
seigneur of Combourg.
In the item below dated 1210 and 1214, Jean de Dol, seigneur of
Combourg, is further identified as the son of H[asculf] de Soligny.
Jean de Dol's wife, Eleanor, is named, along with their two children,
Gedouin and Noga.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + +
Source: Dom Hyacinthe Morice, Memoirs pour Servir de Preuves à
l'Histoire ecclesiastique et civile de Bretagne, volume 1 (1742).
pg. 825-826. Date: 1210 and 1214.
Donations faites à la Vieuville par Jean de Dol & Alienor son épouse.
Notum sit omnibus quod ego Johannes de Dolo filius H. de Soligneio
omnia dona & elemosinas que ab antecessoribus meis & ab hominibus meis
& à me ipso Abbatie Veteris v.collata sunt in omni terra mea de
Britannia in Episcopatu videlicet Maclov. & Dol. in veritate & in bona
voluntate concedo. Concedente A. uxore mea. Jelduino fil. meo, Noga
filia mea. Sigillique mei authoritate confirmo, testibus his D. Abbate
ejusdem loci. Luca & Johanne Monachis. Teste me ipso. G. de Chobar.
G. Spina filio Eudonis. Actum est hoc anno ab Incarnat. Domini MCCX.
Titre de la Vieuville.
Omnibus ego Johannes de Dolo Dominus de Combor notum facio quod dedi
Abbatie Veteris ville, concedente uxore mea Alienor & omnibus heredibus
meis qui tunc erant omnes terras quas possident in grangia sua de Bella
insula; concessi etiam eis terras quas habent de Galan, de Paluel & de
Gaufrido Farsi. Facta est hec concessio & confirmatio anno ab
Incarnatione Dom. MCCXIV. mense Aprili. Titre de la Vieuville.
This is the next in a series of posts which document the newly
discovered Breton ancestry of Sir Elias d'Aubeney (died 1305), Lord
Daubeney in England.
In the previous post, we found that Sir Elias d'Aubeney's mother,
Iseult de Dol, was the daughter of Sir Gedouin de Dol, knight, died c.
1235, and his wife, Eleanor de Vitré, sister of Andre de Vitré. Sir
Geldouin de Dol in turn was found to be the son of Jean de Dol,
seigneur of Combourg.
In the item below dated 1210 and 1214, Jean de Dol, seigneur of
Combourg, is further identified as the son of H[asculf] de Soligny.
Jean de Dol's wife, Eleanor, is named, along with their two children,
Gedouin and Noga.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + +
Source: Dom Hyacinthe Morice, Memoirs pour Servir de Preuves à
l'Histoire ecclesiastique et civile de Bretagne, volume 1 (1742).
pg. 825-826. Date: 1210 and 1214.
Donations faites à la Vieuville par Jean de Dol & Alienor son épouse.
Notum sit omnibus quod ego Johannes de Dolo filius H. de Soligneio
omnia dona & elemosinas que ab antecessoribus meis & ab hominibus meis
& à me ipso Abbatie Veteris v.collata sunt in omni terra mea de
Britannia in Episcopatu videlicet Maclov. & Dol. in veritate & in bona
voluntate concedo. Concedente A. uxore mea. Jelduino fil. meo, Noga
filia mea. Sigillique mei authoritate confirmo, testibus his D. Abbate
ejusdem loci. Luca & Johanne Monachis. Teste me ipso. G. de Chobar.
G. Spina filio Eudonis. Actum est hoc anno ab Incarnat. Domini MCCX.
Titre de la Vieuville.
Omnibus ego Johannes de Dolo Dominus de Combor notum facio quod dedi
Abbatie Veteris ville, concedente uxore mea Alienor & omnibus heredibus
meis qui tunc erant omnes terras quas possident in grangia sua de Bella
insula; concessi etiam eis terras quas habent de Galan, de Paluel & de
Gaufrido Farsi. Facta est hec concessio & confirmatio anno ab
Incarnatione Dom. MCCXIV. mense Aprili. Titre de la Vieuville.
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Complete Peerage Addition: Iseult de Sulney, mother of S
Dear Newsgroup ~
Searching through the National Archives catalogue just now, I turned up
an ancient petition submitted by Elias (or Ellis) Daubeney to the king
requesting that he be granted a writ to John de Mettingham and his
associates to proceed with a plea that he has brought against John de
Willington.
The modern archivist has dated the petition 1289-1301. However, since
it obviously deals with the 1295 lawsuit between Elias d'Aubeney and
John de Willington which I discussed in an earlier post, a better date
of c.1295 would be more appropriate for this petition.
Furthermore, the abstract of the petition indicates that two other
parties, John and Jondewyn, are named in the petition. These would
surely be Sir Ellias d'Aubeney's maternal grandfather, Sir Geldoin de
Dol, and his great-grandfather, Sir Jean de Dol. It would be quite odd
if the petition did not reveal Sir Elias d'Aubeney's relationship to
these two parties. If so, it would seem either the petition is
illegible in places, or the archivist failed to understand the import
of the stated relationships.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + + + + +
SC 8/176/8785
Record Summary
Petitioners: Ellis Daubeney.
Addressees: King.
Places mentioned: John de Metyngham (Mettingham); John de Welington
(Wellington); John; Jondewyn.
Nature of request: Daubeney requests that he be granted a writ to
Mettingham and his companions to proceed in the plea that he brought
against Wellington as it has been pleaded that his ancestors were not
born in England and the case has been delayed.
1) Endorsement: He should have a writ of Chancery to the justices of
the Bench if he wishes, that they should proceed according to the law
and custom of the realm.
2) The petition was expedited on Thursday by the council and not
enrolled.
Covering dates [1289-1301]
Note: The petition is dated to 1289-1301 on the basis of the guard
notes which suggest this date because of the reference to John de
Mettingham.
Searching through the National Archives catalogue just now, I turned up
an ancient petition submitted by Elias (or Ellis) Daubeney to the king
requesting that he be granted a writ to John de Mettingham and his
associates to proceed with a plea that he has brought against John de
Willington.
The modern archivist has dated the petition 1289-1301. However, since
it obviously deals with the 1295 lawsuit between Elias d'Aubeney and
John de Willington which I discussed in an earlier post, a better date
of c.1295 would be more appropriate for this petition.
Furthermore, the abstract of the petition indicates that two other
parties, John and Jondewyn, are named in the petition. These would
surely be Sir Ellias d'Aubeney's maternal grandfather, Sir Geldoin de
Dol, and his great-grandfather, Sir Jean de Dol. It would be quite odd
if the petition did not reveal Sir Elias d'Aubeney's relationship to
these two parties. If so, it would seem either the petition is
illegible in places, or the archivist failed to understand the import
of the stated relationships.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + + + + +
SC 8/176/8785
Record Summary
Petitioners: Ellis Daubeney.
Addressees: King.
Places mentioned: John de Metyngham (Mettingham); John de Welington
(Wellington); John; Jondewyn.
Nature of request: Daubeney requests that he be granted a writ to
Mettingham and his companions to proceed in the plea that he brought
against Wellington as it has been pleaded that his ancestors were not
born in England and the case has been delayed.
1) Endorsement: He should have a writ of Chancery to the justices of
the Bench if he wishes, that they should proceed according to the law
and custom of the realm.
2) The petition was expedited on Thursday by the council and not
enrolled.
Covering dates [1289-1301]
Note: The petition is dated to 1289-1301 on the basis of the guard
notes which suggest this date because of the reference to John de
Mettingham.
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Complete Peerage Addition: Iseult de Dol, mother of Sir
Dear Newsgroup ~
Searching through the National Archives catalogue just now, I turned up
an ancient petition submitted by Elias (or Ellis) Daubeney to the king
requesting that he be granted a writ to John de Mettingham and his
associates to proceed with a plea that he has brought against John de
Willington.
The modern archivist has dated the petition 1289-1301. However, since
it obviously deals with the 1295 lawsuit between Elias d'Aubeney and
John de Willington which I discussed in an earlier post, a better date
of c.1295 would be more appropriate for this petition.
Furthermore, the abstract of the petition indicates that two other
parties, John and Jondewyn, are named in the petition. These would
surely be Sir Ellias d'Aubeney's maternal grandfather, Sir Geldoin de
Dol, and his great-grandfather, Sir Jean de Dol. It would be quite odd
if the petition did not reveal Sir Elias d'Aubeney's relationship to
these two parties. If so, it would seem either the petition is
illegible in places, or the archivist failed to understand the import
of the stated relationships.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + + + + +
SC 8/176/8785
Record Summary
Petitioners: Ellis Daubeney.
Addressees: King.
Places mentioned: John de Metyngham (Mettingham); John de Welington
(Wellington); John; Jondewyn.
Nature of request: Daubeney requests that he be granted a writ to
Mettingham and his companions to proceed in the plea that he brought
against Wellington as it has been pleaded that his ancestors were not
born in England and the case has been delayed.
1) Endorsement: He should have a writ of Chancery to the justices of
the Bench if he wishes, that they should proceed according to the law
and custom of the realm.
2) The petition was expedited on Thursday by the council and not
enrolled.
Covering dates [1289-1301]
Note: The petition is dated to 1289-1301 on the basis of the guard
notes which suggest this date because of the reference to John de
Mettingham.
Searching through the National Archives catalogue just now, I turned up
an ancient petition submitted by Elias (or Ellis) Daubeney to the king
requesting that he be granted a writ to John de Mettingham and his
associates to proceed with a plea that he has brought against John de
Willington.
The modern archivist has dated the petition 1289-1301. However, since
it obviously deals with the 1295 lawsuit between Elias d'Aubeney and
John de Willington which I discussed in an earlier post, a better date
of c.1295 would be more appropriate for this petition.
Furthermore, the abstract of the petition indicates that two other
parties, John and Jondewyn, are named in the petition. These would
surely be Sir Ellias d'Aubeney's maternal grandfather, Sir Geldoin de
Dol, and his great-grandfather, Sir Jean de Dol. It would be quite odd
if the petition did not reveal Sir Elias d'Aubeney's relationship to
these two parties. If so, it would seem either the petition is
illegible in places, or the archivist failed to understand the import
of the stated relationships.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + + + + +
SC 8/176/8785
Record Summary
Petitioners: Ellis Daubeney.
Addressees: King.
Places mentioned: John de Metyngham (Mettingham); John de Welington
(Wellington); John; Jondewyn.
Nature of request: Daubeney requests that he be granted a writ to
Mettingham and his companions to proceed in the plea that he brought
against Wellington as it has been pleaded that his ancestors were not
born in England and the case has been delayed.
1) Endorsement: He should have a writ of Chancery to the justices of
the Bench if he wishes, that they should proceed according to the law
and custom of the realm.
2) The petition was expedited on Thursday by the council and not
enrolled.
Covering dates [1289-1301]
Note: The petition is dated to 1289-1301 on the basis of the guard
notes which suggest this date because of the reference to John de
Mettingham.
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Complete Peerage Addition: Iseult de Sulney, mother of S
"Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1165097330.206177.96760@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
Perhaps you are unaware that the style "Sir" was not used by Breton
noblemen. Or are you now proposing to apply modern British usage to
"ancient" foreign people?
If so, how does this very peculiar (and long-obsolete) practice of using
alien titles fit in with your stated (though not always observed) principle
of calling people by names they used for themselves?
Peter Stewart
news:1165097330.206177.96760@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
Dear Newsgroup ~
Searching through the National Archives catalogue just now, I turned up
an ancient petition submitted by Elias (or Ellis) Daubeney to the king
requesting that he be granted a writ to John de Mettingham and his
associates to proceed with a plea that he has brought against John de
Willington.
The modern archivist has dated the petition 1289-1301. However, since
it obviously deals with the 1295 lawsuit between Elias d'Aubeney and
John de Willington which I discussed in an earlier post, a better date
of c.1295 would be more appropriate for this petition.
Furthermore, the abstract of the petition indicates that two other
parties, John and Jondewyn, are named in the petition. These would
surely be Sir Ellias d'Aubeney's maternal grandfather, Sir Geldoin de
Dol, and his great-grandfather, Sir Jean de Dol. It would be quite odd
if the petition did not reveal Sir Elias d'Aubeney's relationship to
these two parties. If so, it would seem either the petition is
illegible in places, or the archivist failed to understand the import
of the stated relationships.
Perhaps you are unaware that the style "Sir" was not used by Breton
noblemen. Or are you now proposing to apply modern British usage to
"ancient" foreign people?
If so, how does this very peculiar (and long-obsolete) practice of using
alien titles fit in with your stated (though not always observed) principle
of calling people by names they used for themselves?
Peter Stewart
-
Steve
Re: Complete Peerage Addition: Iseult de Dol, mother of Sir
Douglas, that document is available to download for free, so why don't
you download it and read it yourself.
Steve
Douglas Richardson wrote:
you download it and read it yourself.
Steve
Douglas Richardson wrote:
Dear Newsgroup ~
Searching through the National Archives catalogue just now, I turned up
an ancient petition submitted by Elias (or Ellis) Daubeney to the king
requesting that he be granted a writ to John de Mettingham and his
associates to proceed with a plea that he has brought against John de
Willington.
The modern archivist has dated the petition 1289-1301. However, since
it obviously deals with the 1295 lawsuit between Elias d'Aubeney and
John de Willington which I discussed in an earlier post, a better date
of c.1295 would be more appropriate for this petition.
Furthermore, the abstract of the petition indicates that two other
parties, John and Jondewyn, are named in the petition. These would
surely be Sir Ellias d'Aubeney's maternal grandfather, Sir Geldoin de
Dol, and his great-grandfather, Sir Jean de Dol. It would be quite odd
if the petition did not reveal Sir Elias d'Aubeney's relationship to
these two parties. If so, it would seem either the petition is
illegible in places, or the archivist failed to understand the import
of the stated relationships.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + + + + +
SC 8/176/8785
Record Summary
Petitioners: Ellis Daubeney.
Addressees: King.
Places mentioned: John de Metyngham (Mettingham); John de Welington
(Wellington); John; Jondewyn.
Nature of request: Daubeney requests that he be granted a writ to
Mettingham and his companions to proceed in the plea that he brought
against Wellington as it has been pleaded that his ancestors were not
born in England and the case has been delayed.
1) Endorsement: He should have a writ of Chancery to the justices of
the Bench if he wishes, that they should proceed according to the law
and custom of the realm.
2) The petition was expedited on Thursday by the council and not
enrolled.
Covering dates [1289-1301]
Note: The petition is dated to 1289-1301 on the basis of the guard
notes which suggest this date because of the reference to John de
Mettingham.
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Complete Peerage Addition: Iseult de Dol, mother of Sir
Dear Steve ~
I searched the Ancient Petitions database for the name Jondewyn both as
a first name and as a last name. Both times it said no entries were
found. I then tried searching the database for the name Ellis Daubeney
and the correct entry came up.
I downloaded the petition as you suggested. I found it difficult to
read in digital form. Perhaps you can do it justice.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
I searched the Ancient Petitions database for the name Jondewyn both as
a first name and as a last name. Both times it said no entries were
found. I then tried searching the database for the name Ellis Daubeney
and the correct entry came up.
I downloaded the petition as you suggested. I found it difficult to
read in digital form. Perhaps you can do it justice.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah