Mary de Roos, wife of Sir William de Brewes, 1st Lord Brewes

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Douglas Richardson

Mary de Roos, wife of Sir William de Brewes, 1st Lord Brewes

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson » 08 jan 2007 20:44:13

Dear Newsgroup ~

Regarding John Ravilious's comment regarding the parentage of Mary de
Roos, wife of Sir William de Brewes, 1st Lord Brewes, of Bramber,
Sussex, I might point out that VCH Surrey, volume 3 (see full abstract
below) shows that Mary de Brewes held the manor of Little Bookham,
Surrey jointly with her husband, William de Brewes, during the time of
their marriage. In 1303, as a widow, Mary settled this manor on her
daughter and son-in-law, Margaret and Ralph de Camoys. In 1307, when
an assize of novel disseisin was brought against Ralph and Margaret by
James Hansard with regard to this manor, Ralph and Margaret summoned
Mary to secure them against loss, and "Mary thereupon agreed that if
they or their heirs should be deprived of the manor, she and her heirs
would make good such loss out of her manor of Wynesthorp in Yorkshire."
Thus, the VCH account indicates that Mary, wife of Sir William de
Brewes, held both the manors of Little Bookham, Surrey and
'Wynesthorp,' Yorkshire.

Although I haven't researched this matter in depth for this post, I
believe Wynesthorp is the same property as Weaverthorpe, Yorkshire
which was Mary (de Roos) de Brewes' maritagium [see Douglas Richardson,
Magna Carta Ancestry (2005)]. This manor would surely be the same
property as unspecified "lands in Yorkshire" that Mary de Brewes held
of her nephew, William de Roos of Helmsley, at the time of her death in
1326. I believe that the Roos family's interest in Weaverthorpe,
Yorkshire came through the marriage of Mary de Roos' grandfather, Sir
William de Roos, to Lucy, daughter of Peter Fitz Herbert. The Fitz
Herbert family held Weaverthorpe, Yorkshire from an early period.

In any event, I seriously doubt that the other Mary, wife of Ralph de
Tony, was a Roos. The best evidence in hand to date seems to suggest
she was a member of the Brus family of Scotland. Certainly her son was
born in Scotland. For now, Mary de Tony's identity remains unproven.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

+ + + + + + + + + + + +
Source: VCH Surrey, 3 (1911): 335-338.
Available online at:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report ... %20Bookham

Manor: Little Bookham
Parish: Little Bookham, Surrey

The subtenancy of the manor appears to have continued with the
descendants of Halsard, the Domesday tenant. In 1189 William de Braose
accounted to the sheriff of Surrey for £8 7s. 4d. of the amercement of
William Hansard, whose heir was in his custody, (fn. 14) and this heir
was probably the William Hansard who is found holding a fee in
'Bocheam' (Bookham) and Cateworthe of the honour of Bramber in
1210-12, (fn. 15) and again between 1234 and 1241. In 1273 John and
James, sons of William Hansard, made a joint conveyance of lands in
Little Bookham to the Prior of St. Mary Southwark, (fn. 16) and in 1275
John (here Sir John) died seised of the manor of Bookham, (fn. 17)
leaving as his heir his nephew James son of James Hansard.

It seems however that James Hansard, the elder, had already made a
grant to William de Braose (the overlord), (fn. 18) and in 1291 Mary
widow of William de Braose had livery of the manor, which she is said
to have held jointly with her husband before his death in 1290, (fn.
19) and of which she enfeoffed Ralph de Camoys and Margaret her
daughter, wife of Ralph, in 1303. (fn. 20) In 1306 Ralph and Margaret
obtained licence to regrant the manor to Mary for life, with reversion
to themselves and heirs of Margaret. (fn. 21)

In the next year, consequent upon an assize of novel disseisin having
been brought against them by James Hansard with regard to this manor,
Ralph and Margaret summoned Mary to secure them against loss, and Mary
thereupon agreed that if they or their heirs should be deprived of the
manor, she and her heirs would make good such loss out of her manor of
Wynesthorp in Yorkshire. (fn. 22)."

This is the last mention of the Hansards in connexion with the manor,
which, however, in 1399 appears under the name of Bookham Hansard. (fn.
23) Mary de Braose died in 1326, her next heir being her grandson
Thomas son of Peter de Braose, then aged 26. (fn. 24) Ralph and
Margaret however had seisin of this manor in accordance with the above
settlement, (fn. 25) but before 1334 it was acquired from them by the
said Thomas de Braose, who in that year had licence to convey it to
Robert de Harpurdesford, (fn. 26) for the purpose of settlement on
himself and Beatrice his wife and their heirs.

Thomas died seised of the manor in 1361, leaving a son John, who died
in 1367, and in 1372-3 the manor was conveyed by Sir Peter de Braose
and others to Beatrice, widow of Thomas, for her life, with remainder
to her children, Thomas, Peter, Elizabeth, and Joan, and their heirs
respectively, and in default of such to the right heirs of Thomas. (fn.
27) Beatrice died in 1383, (fn. 28) and in 1395, on the death of her
son Thomas, and of his infant children Thomas and Joan a few weeks
later, (fn. 29) the manor passed to Elizabeth, the daughter of Beatrice
mentioned above and now wife of Sir William Heron. Elizabeth died
without issue on 8 July 1399, (fn. 30) and in the inquisition taken the
next year on the Duke of Norfolk, one of the heirs of the Braoses, this
manor was said to be held by Sir William Heron, (fn. 31) on whose death
in 1404 (fn. 32) it reverted to the Braose line represented by George
son of John son of Peter de Braose. (fn. 33)" END OF QUOTE.

Footnotes:

14 Pipe R. 1189-90 (Rec. Com.), 218.
15 Red Bk. of Exch. (Rolls Ser.), 561.
16 Feet of F. Div. Co. 1 & 2 Edw. I, no. 11.
17 Chan. Inq. p.m. Edw. I, file 11, no. 1.
18 Cal. Close, 1272-9, p. 501.
19 Ibid. 1288-96, pp. 160, 162.
20 Cal. Pat. 1301-7, p. 147; Chan. Inq. p.m. 31 Edw. I, no. 68.
21 Chan. Inq. p.m. 33 Edw. I, no. 264; Cal. Pat. 1301-7, p. 442;
Feet of F. Surr. Trin. 34 Edw. I, 134, 13.
22 Add. Chart. 20036.
23 Chan. Inq. p.m. Hen. IV, file 17.
24 Ibid. 19 Edw. II, no. 90.
25 Cal. Close, 1323-7, p. 437. Peter father of Thomas had claimed
the manor against Ralph and Margaret in 1306 (Feet of F. Surr. 39 Edw.
I, no. 13).
26 Cal. Pat. 1334-8, p. 62; Feet of F. Div. Co. 11 Edw. III, no. 22.
27 Add. MSS. 5705.
28 Chan. Inq. p.m. 7 Ric. II, no. 15.
29 Ibid. 19 Ric. II, no. 7.
30 Suss. Arch. Coll. viii, 100.
31 Chan. Inq. p.m. 1 Hen. IV, no. 71b.
32 Ibid. 6 Hen. IV, no. 21.
33 Pat. 24 Hen. VI, pt. i, m. 28; Suss. Arch. Coll. viii, 101.

John P. Ravilious

Re: Mary de Roos, wife of Sir William de Brewes, 1st Lord Br

Legg inn av John P. Ravilious » 08 jan 2007 23:29:12

Dear Doug,

I would agree that 'Werthorp', or 'Wynesthorp', was almost
certainly the 'Wyverthorpe' which Lucy, daughter of Piers fitz Herbert,
brought to her marriage with Sir William de Ros (d. ca. 1264).
However, other than this land appearing in the possession of Mary, wife
of William de Braose, in 1307, it does not make her parentage more than
probable. She held it of William de Ros of Helmsley [als Hamlake], but
he could as easily have been a cousin as her brother. My proposal,
that her father was Sir Piers de Ros [younger son of Sir William de Ros
and Lucy] would still 'work' - if he had obtained land in Wiverthorpe
or 'Wynesthorp' from his mother, to hold of his elder brother.

If further information can be obtained [the IPM of Sir Robert
de Ros, d. 17 May 1285, would be one item in particular] this matter
may yet be resolved.

Cheers,

John


Douglas Richardson wrote:
Dear Newsgroup ~

Regarding John Ravilious's comment regarding the parentage of Mary de
Roos, wife of Sir William de Brewes, 1st Lord Brewes, of Bramber,
Sussex, I might point out that VCH Surrey, volume 3 (see full abstract
below) shows that Mary de Brewes held the manor of Little Bookham,
Surrey jointly with her husband, William de Brewes, during the time of
their marriage. In 1303, as a widow, Mary settled this manor on her
daughter and son-in-law, Margaret and Ralph de Camoys. In 1307, when
an assize of novel disseisin was brought against Ralph and Margaret by
James Hansard with regard to this manor, Ralph and Margaret summoned
Mary to secure them against loss, and "Mary thereupon agreed that if
they or their heirs should be deprived of the manor, she and her heirs
would make good such loss out of her manor of Wynesthorp in Yorkshire."
Thus, the VCH account indicates that Mary, wife of Sir William de
Brewes, held both the manors of Little Bookham, Surrey and
'Wynesthorp,' Yorkshire.

Although I haven't researched this matter in depth for this post, I
believe Wynesthorp is the same property as Weaverthorpe, Yorkshire
which was Mary (de Roos) de Brewes' maritagium [see Douglas Richardson,
Magna Carta Ancestry (2005)]. This manor would surely be the same
property as unspecified "lands in Yorkshire" that Mary de Brewes held
of her nephew, William de Roos of Helmsley, at the time of her death in
1326. I believe that the Roos family's interest in Weaverthorpe,
Yorkshire came through the marriage of Mary de Roos' grandfather, Sir
William de Roos, to Lucy, daughter of Peter Fitz Herbert. The Fitz
Herbert family held Weaverthorpe, Yorkshire from an early period.

In any event, I seriously doubt that the other Mary, wife of Ralph de
Tony, was a Roos. The best evidence in hand to date seems to suggest
she was a member of the Brus family of Scotland. Certainly her son was
born in Scotland. For now, Mary de Tony's identity remains unproven.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

+ + + + + + + + + + + +
Source: VCH Surrey, 3 (1911): 335-338.
Available online at:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report ... %20Bookham

Manor: Little Bookham
Parish: Little Bookham, Surrey

The subtenancy of the manor appears to have continued with the
descendants of Halsard, the Domesday tenant. In 1189 William de Braose
accounted to the sheriff of Surrey for £8 7s. 4d. of the amercement of
William Hansard, whose heir was in his custody, (fn. 14) and this heir
was probably the William Hansard who is found holding a fee in
'Bocheam' (Bookham) and Cateworthe of the honour of Bramber in
1210-12, (fn. 15) and again between 1234 and 1241. In 1273 John and
James, sons of William Hansard, made a joint conveyance of lands in
Little Bookham to the Prior of St. Mary Southwark, (fn. 16) and in 1275
John (here Sir John) died seised of the manor of Bookham, (fn. 17)
leaving as his heir his nephew James son of James Hansard.

It seems however that James Hansard, the elder, had already made a
grant to William de Braose (the overlord), (fn. 18) and in 1291 Mary
widow of William de Braose had livery of the manor, which she is said
to have held jointly with her husband before his death in 1290, (fn.
19) and of which she enfeoffed Ralph de Camoys and Margaret her
daughter, wife of Ralph, in 1303. (fn. 20) In 1306 Ralph and Margaret
obtained licence to regrant the manor to Mary for life, with reversion
to themselves and heirs of Margaret. (fn. 21)

In the next year, consequent upon an assize of novel disseisin having
been brought against them by James Hansard with regard to this manor,
Ralph and Margaret summoned Mary to secure them against loss, and Mary
thereupon agreed that if they or their heirs should be deprived of the
manor, she and her heirs would make good such loss out of her manor of
Wynesthorp in Yorkshire. (fn. 22)."

This is the last mention of the Hansards in connexion with the manor,
which, however, in 1399 appears under the name of Bookham Hansard. (fn.
23) Mary de Braose died in 1326, her next heir being her grandson
Thomas son of Peter de Braose, then aged 26. (fn. 24) Ralph and
Margaret however had seisin of this manor in accordance with the above
settlement, (fn. 25) but before 1334 it was acquired from them by the
said Thomas de Braose, who in that year had licence to convey it to
Robert de Harpurdesford, (fn. 26) for the purpose of settlement on
himself and Beatrice his wife and their heirs.

Thomas died seised of the manor in 1361, leaving a son John, who died
in 1367, and in 1372-3 the manor was conveyed by Sir Peter de Braose
and others to Beatrice, widow of Thomas, for her life, with remainder
to her children, Thomas, Peter, Elizabeth, and Joan, and their heirs
respectively, and in default of such to the right heirs of Thomas. (fn.
27) Beatrice died in 1383, (fn. 28) and in 1395, on the death of her
son Thomas, and of his infant children Thomas and Joan a few weeks
later, (fn. 29) the manor passed to Elizabeth, the daughter of Beatrice
mentioned above and now wife of Sir William Heron. Elizabeth died
without issue on 8 July 1399, (fn. 30) and in the inquisition taken the
next year on the Duke of Norfolk, one of the heirs of the Braoses, this
manor was said to be held by Sir William Heron, (fn. 31) on whose death
in 1404 (fn. 32) it reverted to the Braose line represented by George
son of John son of Peter de Braose. (fn. 33)" END OF QUOTE.

Footnotes:

14 Pipe R. 1189-90 (Rec. Com.), 218.
15 Red Bk. of Exch. (Rolls Ser.), 561.
16 Feet of F. Div. Co. 1 & 2 Edw. I, no. 11.
17 Chan. Inq. p.m. Edw. I, file 11, no. 1.
18 Cal. Close, 1272-9, p. 501.
19 Ibid. 1288-96, pp. 160, 162.
20 Cal. Pat. 1301-7, p. 147; Chan. Inq. p.m. 31 Edw. I, no. 68.
21 Chan. Inq. p.m. 33 Edw. I, no. 264; Cal. Pat. 1301-7, p. 442;
Feet of F. Surr. Trin. 34 Edw. I, 134, 13.
22 Add. Chart. 20036.
23 Chan. Inq. p.m. Hen. IV, file 17.
24 Ibid. 19 Edw. II, no. 90.
25 Cal. Close, 1323-7, p. 437. Peter father of Thomas had claimed
the manor against Ralph and Margaret in 1306 (Feet of F. Surr. 39 Edw.
I, no. 13).
26 Cal. Pat. 1334-8, p. 62; Feet of F. Div. Co. 11 Edw. III, no. 22.
27 Add. MSS. 5705.
28 Chan. Inq. p.m. 7 Ric. II, no. 15.
29 Ibid. 19 Ric. II, no. 7.
30 Suss. Arch. Coll. viii, 100.
31 Chan. Inq. p.m. 1 Hen. IV, no. 71b.
32 Ibid. 6 Hen. IV, no. 21.
33 Pat. 24 Hen. VI, pt. i, m. 28; Suss. Arch. Coll. viii, 101.

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»