The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Gjest
The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
Thoroton provides a tentative pedigree for the Loudham family of
Nottinghamshire, which became extinct in the male line with the death
of Sir John Loudham in 1391; his heirs were his sisters, who took the
family's property to the Bekering and Foljambe families.
The earliest Loudham known to Thoroton was Eustace, who was Sheriff of
Nottingham in the time of King John. He starts the pedigree proper
with Sir Walter de Loudham.
In fact, we know that Sir Walter was the son of Eustace de Loudham,
because at least two documents explicitly state this, viz:
As "Walter de Loudham, son of Eustace de Loudham", he made a feoffment
to Elias de Midhop of the manor of Langeside, c1253 (West Yorks RO,
SpSt/4/11/79/1);
In a recital of an ancient charter we find as witnesses "Eustachio de
Ludham et Waltero filio ejus [Eustace de Ludham and Walter his son]
(Cal. Pat. R, 19 Edward II, Part 1, p 189).
Additional details of the career of this Sir Walter and his son, also
Sir Walter, may be found in "Knights of Edward I". The second Sir
Walter was succeeded by his son, Sir John de Loudham (died 1318).
It is this Sir John who has been the subject of much conjecture here
in the past, since it appears he inherited property at Tolleshunt in
Essex from the Tregoz family. An IPM has been cited here in the past
showing that in 1292, the heirs of Nicholas Tregoz were his three
nephews, John de Bois, John de Loudham and James de Bornham. Further
primary references to a lawsuit over this inheritance by John de Bosco
[ie Bois], John de Gernoun and James de Bornham have led to
suggestions that John de Loudham and John de Gernoun were the same
individual - a proposal which seemed to be at odds with other known
details.
In fact, the 1292 IPM (Eve de Valoignes, Cal. IPMs, Edward I Vol III,
#150, p 94) names *four* nephews and heirs: John de Bois, aged 24,
James de Bornham, aged 26, John de Ludham, aged 22, and John Gernoun,
aged 23. This is confirmed by a reference to John de Bosco holding a
fourth part of the Tregoz inheritance (PRO C143/131/15, 11 Edward II).
Accordingly we can conclude that the mother of Sir John de Loudham
(born circa 1269) was a fourth sister of Nicholas de Tregoz, and thus
a daughter of Geoffrey de Tregoz of Essex.
Stemma:
1. Eustace de Loudham, Sheriff of Notts, ff 1226
2. Sir Walter de Loudham, dead by 1272
3. Sir Walter de Loudham, ff 1310; married a daughter of Geoffrey de
Tregoz
4. Sir John de Loudham, c1269 - 1318, married Alice de Kirketon (died
9 October 1344)
5. Sir John de Loudham, c1314 - 6 November 1387; married Isabel le
Breton
6a. Sir John de Loudham, died without issue 28 August 1390
6b. Alice de Loudham, died without issue
6c. Isabel de Loudham, married Thomas Bekering
6d. Margaret de Loudham, married Thomas Foljambe, MP
MA-R
Nottinghamshire, which became extinct in the male line with the death
of Sir John Loudham in 1391; his heirs were his sisters, who took the
family's property to the Bekering and Foljambe families.
The earliest Loudham known to Thoroton was Eustace, who was Sheriff of
Nottingham in the time of King John. He starts the pedigree proper
with Sir Walter de Loudham.
In fact, we know that Sir Walter was the son of Eustace de Loudham,
because at least two documents explicitly state this, viz:
As "Walter de Loudham, son of Eustace de Loudham", he made a feoffment
to Elias de Midhop of the manor of Langeside, c1253 (West Yorks RO,
SpSt/4/11/79/1);
In a recital of an ancient charter we find as witnesses "Eustachio de
Ludham et Waltero filio ejus [Eustace de Ludham and Walter his son]
(Cal. Pat. R, 19 Edward II, Part 1, p 189).
Additional details of the career of this Sir Walter and his son, also
Sir Walter, may be found in "Knights of Edward I". The second Sir
Walter was succeeded by his son, Sir John de Loudham (died 1318).
It is this Sir John who has been the subject of much conjecture here
in the past, since it appears he inherited property at Tolleshunt in
Essex from the Tregoz family. An IPM has been cited here in the past
showing that in 1292, the heirs of Nicholas Tregoz were his three
nephews, John de Bois, John de Loudham and James de Bornham. Further
primary references to a lawsuit over this inheritance by John de Bosco
[ie Bois], John de Gernoun and James de Bornham have led to
suggestions that John de Loudham and John de Gernoun were the same
individual - a proposal which seemed to be at odds with other known
details.
In fact, the 1292 IPM (Eve de Valoignes, Cal. IPMs, Edward I Vol III,
#150, p 94) names *four* nephews and heirs: John de Bois, aged 24,
James de Bornham, aged 26, John de Ludham, aged 22, and John Gernoun,
aged 23. This is confirmed by a reference to John de Bosco holding a
fourth part of the Tregoz inheritance (PRO C143/131/15, 11 Edward II).
Accordingly we can conclude that the mother of Sir John de Loudham
(born circa 1269) was a fourth sister of Nicholas de Tregoz, and thus
a daughter of Geoffrey de Tregoz of Essex.
Stemma:
1. Eustace de Loudham, Sheriff of Notts, ff 1226
2. Sir Walter de Loudham, dead by 1272
3. Sir Walter de Loudham, ff 1310; married a daughter of Geoffrey de
Tregoz
4. Sir John de Loudham, c1269 - 1318, married Alice de Kirketon (died
9 October 1344)
5. Sir John de Loudham, c1314 - 6 November 1387; married Isabel le
Breton
6a. Sir John de Loudham, died without issue 28 August 1390
6b. Alice de Loudham, died without issue
6c. Isabel de Loudham, married Thomas Bekering
6d. Margaret de Loudham, married Thomas Foljambe, MP
MA-R
-
Gjest
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
On 30 Jun., 10:56, m...@btinternet.com wrote:
In addition to providing this Sir John with a brother, the following
entry from the Diary of Abraham Pryme, an antiquarian collector of
deeds, paints an interesting picture of early 14th century life:
John de Loudham grants to William de Loudham, his brother, one Thomas
Locks of Wintringham [Lincs], "nativum meum de manerio meo de
Wintringham [my serf of my manor of Wintringham]", 7 July 1316
William de Loudham makes Thomas Locks free and manumits him from all
conditions of servitude absolutely and in perpetuity, 20 July 1316.
MAR
Stemma:
1. Eustace de Loudham, Sheriff of Notts, ff 1226
2. Sir Walter de Loudham, dead by 1272
3. Sir Walter de Loudham, ff 1310; married a daughter of Geoffrey de
Tregoz
4. Sir John de Loudham, c1269 - 1318
In addition to providing this Sir John with a brother, the following
entry from the Diary of Abraham Pryme, an antiquarian collector of
deeds, paints an interesting picture of early 14th century life:
John de Loudham grants to William de Loudham, his brother, one Thomas
Locks of Wintringham [Lincs], "nativum meum de manerio meo de
Wintringham [my serf of my manor of Wintringham]", 7 July 1316
William de Loudham makes Thomas Locks free and manumits him from all
conditions of servitude absolutely and in perpetuity, 20 July 1316.
MAR
-
suthen
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
On Jul 1, 9:44 pm, m...@btinternet.com wrote:
I don't have current access, but I believe that _The Grelseys of
Drakelowe_ places Hawise de Tregoz as daughter of Nicholas d. 1279
when in fact she would be his sister. Her husband ws Ralph de Gernon
of Easthorpe, Essex d. 1274 and she had two sons, John and Richard and
two daughters Alice (wife of Robert Baynard) and Margaret (wife of
Robert de Verley).
So Hawise may be the name of one of the four sisters of Nicholas.
HS
1. Eustace de Loudham, Sheriff of Notts, ff 1226
2. Sir Walter de Loudham, dead by 1272
3. Sir Walter de Loudham, ff 1310; married a daughter of Geoffrey de
Tregoz
4. Sir John de Loudham, c1269 - 1318
In addition to providing this Sir John with a brother, the following
entry from the Diary of Abraham Pryme, an antiquarian collector of
deeds, paints an interesting picture of early 14th century life:
John de Loudham grants to William de Loudham, his brother, one Thomas
Locks of Wintringham [Lincs], "nativum meum de manerio meo de
Wintringham [my serf of my manor of Wintringham]", 7 July 1316
William de Loudham makes Thomas Locks free and manumits him from all
conditions of servitude absolutely and in perpetuity, 20 July 1316.
MAR
I don't have current access, but I believe that _The Grelseys of
Drakelowe_ places Hawise de Tregoz as daughter of Nicholas d. 1279
when in fact she would be his sister. Her husband ws Ralph de Gernon
of Easthorpe, Essex d. 1274 and she had two sons, John and Richard and
two daughters Alice (wife of Robert Baynard) and Margaret (wife of
Robert de Verley).
So Hawise may be the name of one of the four sisters of Nicholas.
HS
-
Rosie Bevan
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
This is indeed the case, Hap.
The following record gives the names of the four sisters of Nicholas.
Joan was evidently the wife of Walter de Loudham and mother of John de
Loudham.
Paul Brand (ed.).Parliament Rolls of Medieval England, 1275-1504, vol
1, p. 563
2 (2). Concerning the heirs of Nicholas de Tregoz and Hugh of
Crepping. The lord king recently ordered his beloved clerk Malcolm of
Harley, his escheator etc., by his writ etc. that because Eve de
Valoynes, who held of the lord king in chief, had died, he was to take
all the lands and tenements, with their appurtenances, of which the
aforesaid Eve was seised in her demesne as of fee in his bailiwick, on
the day that she died, without delay into the hand of the lord king,
and to keep them safe until etc. and to enquire into the next heirs
etc., and to send the inquisition etc. on that matter to the lord
king, by which inquisition, conducted by the same escheator and sent
to the lord king, it was found that the aforesaid Eve held nothing of
the lord king in chief, nor of anyone else, in her demesne as of fee,
on the day on which she died, but that the same Eve held the manors of
Tolleshunt Tregoze and Blunt's Hall, in the county of Essex, on the
day on which she died, for the term of her life, of the gift and
feoffment of Robert Burnell, formerly bishop of Bath and Wells, who
jointly enfeoffed the same Eve and Nicholas Tregoz, formerly her
husband, of the aforesaid manors, to hold to the same Nicholas and
Eve, and to their heirs legitimately begotten by them, of the lord
king in chief for the service of two knights' fees. And, if it should
happen that the same Nicholas and Eve should die without issue of
their bodies legitimately begotten, then the same tenements were to
remain to the heirs of the same Nicholas etc.
And now a certain John de Boys, the son of a certain Lucy, and a
certain James of Burnham, the son of a certain Alice, and a certain
John of Ludham, the son of a certain Joan, and a certain John Gernoun,
the son of a certain Hawise, the sons and heirs of the aforesaid Lucy
and the other sisters and heirs of the aforesaid Nicholas Tregoze,
appear. They request that since it has been found by the aforesaid
inquisition that the aforesaid Nicholas their uncle, whose heirs they
are, was seised in his demesne of the aforesaid tenements on the day
on which he died, and that these tenements were taken into the lord
king's hand by the aforesaid inquisition, the lord king might be
pleased to order the seisin of the aforesaid tenements to be delivered
to them etc.
Whereupon a certain Hugh of Crepping appears. He says that the seisin
of the aforesaid tenements ought to be delivered to him, and not to
the aforesaid heirs. For he says that the aforesaid Nicholas was
seised of the same tenements, as of his right and inheritance, for a
long time, and that afterwards out of his seisin he enfeoffed the same
Hugh with the same tenements, to hold to him and to his heirs in
perpetuity, and put him in good and peaceful seisin of them a long
time before his death, which seisin the same Hugh continued during the
lifetime of the aforesaid Nicholas for a long time, and at the time of
his death and afterwards, until the same Hugh demised them to the
aforesaid Eve at the same Hugh's pleasure; and he says that it was in
this way that the aforesaid Eve died seised of the aforesaid
tenements. He also says that at the time when the aforesaid Nicholas
enfeoffed him of the aforesaid tenements, the same Hugh had a writ of
the lord king addressed to a certain William de St. Clair, then the
king's escheator, that he should allow him to enter the aforesaid
tenements, since they were held of the lord king in chief. And he
requests the lord king to be pleased to deliver seisin of his
aforesaid tenements to him etc.
And the aforesaid heirs say that, whatever has been found by the
aforesaid inquisition, or whatever the aforesaid Hugh says about the
aforesaid enfeoffment made to him by the aforesaid Nicholas, their
ancestor, or about the seisin delivered to him, the aforesaid Nicholas
never divested himself of the aforesaid tenements nor gave the
aforesaid Hugh any estate in them, but rather died seised of them in
his demesne as in fee and that they are his next heirs. And they
request that it be ascertained by a jury whether this be the case. And
Hugh likewise.
Appendix - vol.1, p.607
2. i) For the original inquisition post mortem authorised by a writ
of 16 January 1293 but not held until 12 April see CIPM, vol. III, no.
150
ii) The case was enrolled in King's Bench in Trinity term 1293 with
the heading Essex placitum missum de consilio, with some minor
differences in the text of the entry, omitting the final sentence and
with a sequel recorded: KB 27/137, mm. 17d-18
[the sequel as recorded in this entry]
On which day the parties appeared and also the jurors who say on their
oath that the said Nicholas Tregoze held the said tenements of the
lord king and gave them to Robert Burnel, late bishop of Bath and
Wells, to hold to himself and his heirs, who was peacefully seised of
them from the feast of Saint Barnabas to the First of August and then
the same bishop enfeoffed the said Nicholas and one Eve his wife of
the said manors, to be held to themselves and the heirs begotten of
their bodies; and, if the said Eve died without an heir begotten of
the said Nicholas, the same manors were to remain to the said Nicholas
and his heirs etc. They say that the same Nicholas, after long
possessing such seisin, demised the said manors subsequently to the
said bishop for a term of six years, and the same bishop demised the
manor of Blunt's Hall to Nicholas de Dyham and demised the other manor
of Tolleshunt to the vicar of the same village for a term of years.
They say that the said Nicholas Tregoze subsequently made a charter
for the said manors to the said Hugh and sent a certain John of Ewell
and Henry of Colne to put the same Hugh in seisin of the same
tenements and the said Hugh together with the said attorneys, John and
Henry, first came to the manor of Blunt's Hall and tried to enter it
but the said Nicholas de Dyham did not allow this, but closed the
doors so that they could not enter, and the said Hugh cut down a hedge
outside the manor house but did not carry it off or work or take any
thing of value because of the resistence of the said Nicholas de
Dyham, and they then went to the manor of Tolleshunt and with the
consent and agreement of the said attorneys he took the fealties of
some tenants of the same manor, namely of those who were willing to do
this without being forced, but he took no payment from them by way of
acknowledgement, nor did he take anything else of profit. Asked if the
said Hugh, whether in person or through another, took any profits or
otherwise used his seisin during the lifetime of Nicholas Tregoze they
say not. They explain that he neither ploughed, sowed, reaped nor took
any other profits because the farmers of the said bishop did not allow
him to do this. They say in addition that the said Hugh went to the
said bishop of Bath and Wells in Gascony and obtained there a letter
from the same bishop of credence, and before he returned the said
Nicholas Tregoze had died. And then the said Hugh began to act as
owner on his own authority in the said manors and to impede the seisin
of the said Eve, and so the said Eve brought an assize of novel
disseisin against the said Hugh and by reason of the feoffment of the
said manors made by the said bishop to the said Nicholas Tregoze and
Eve it was found by the said assize that the said Eve was never out of
seisin of the same tenements from the time of the said feoffment and
thus the said manors remained to the said Eve by judgment, as of those
of which she had been jointly enfeoffed with her husband by the
feoffment of the said bishop. Asked if the said Nicholas Tregoze and
Eve had died without heirs of their bodies they say yes. Also asked
whether the said Nicholas Tregoze died seised of the said tenements as
of fee etc., they say that they have told the truth of the matter and
request the assistance of the discretion of the justices. And for the
better information of the court the chancellor sent an inquisition
made by the king's order by Malcolm of Harley, his escheator this side
of the Trent, which inquisition with writ resides among the recorda of
this year, and which agrees in substance with the said verdict and by
which it is found that the said John de Boys, James of Burnham, John
of Loudham [with note at bottom of m. 17d 'Look on the following
membrane' and at top of m. 18: 'continuation of the Tregoze record']
and John Gernun, the nephews of the said Nicholas, are the next heirs
of the same Nicholas, to whom the same tenements ought revert. The
said John de Boys was of the age of twenty four at Easter last and the
said James was of the age of twenty six at the Purification of Saint
Mary last and John of Loudham was of the age of twenty two years at
Christmas last and John Gernun was of the age of twenty three at
Michaelmas last, so it seems to the court that seisin of the said
tenements should rather be handed over to the said parceners John,
James, John, and John from the hands of the lord king than to the said
Hugh. The said Malcolm, the escheator, is therefore instructed that,
after having taken a sufficient surety from the said parceners John,
James, John, and John, for payment of a reasonable relief to the lord
king for the said tenements, he is to hand over seisin of the same
tenements without delay to the same, without prejudice to the right of
anyone. The said John, James, John and John are told to perform homage
to the lord king for the said tenements etc.
On Jul 4, 3:11 am, suthen <sut...@redshift.com> wrote:
The following record gives the names of the four sisters of Nicholas.
Joan was evidently the wife of Walter de Loudham and mother of John de
Loudham.
Paul Brand (ed.).Parliament Rolls of Medieval England, 1275-1504, vol
1, p. 563
2 (2). Concerning the heirs of Nicholas de Tregoz and Hugh of
Crepping. The lord king recently ordered his beloved clerk Malcolm of
Harley, his escheator etc., by his writ etc. that because Eve de
Valoynes, who held of the lord king in chief, had died, he was to take
all the lands and tenements, with their appurtenances, of which the
aforesaid Eve was seised in her demesne as of fee in his bailiwick, on
the day that she died, without delay into the hand of the lord king,
and to keep them safe until etc. and to enquire into the next heirs
etc., and to send the inquisition etc. on that matter to the lord
king, by which inquisition, conducted by the same escheator and sent
to the lord king, it was found that the aforesaid Eve held nothing of
the lord king in chief, nor of anyone else, in her demesne as of fee,
on the day on which she died, but that the same Eve held the manors of
Tolleshunt Tregoze and Blunt's Hall, in the county of Essex, on the
day on which she died, for the term of her life, of the gift and
feoffment of Robert Burnell, formerly bishop of Bath and Wells, who
jointly enfeoffed the same Eve and Nicholas Tregoz, formerly her
husband, of the aforesaid manors, to hold to the same Nicholas and
Eve, and to their heirs legitimately begotten by them, of the lord
king in chief for the service of two knights' fees. And, if it should
happen that the same Nicholas and Eve should die without issue of
their bodies legitimately begotten, then the same tenements were to
remain to the heirs of the same Nicholas etc.
And now a certain John de Boys, the son of a certain Lucy, and a
certain James of Burnham, the son of a certain Alice, and a certain
John of Ludham, the son of a certain Joan, and a certain John Gernoun,
the son of a certain Hawise, the sons and heirs of the aforesaid Lucy
and the other sisters and heirs of the aforesaid Nicholas Tregoze,
appear. They request that since it has been found by the aforesaid
inquisition that the aforesaid Nicholas their uncle, whose heirs they
are, was seised in his demesne of the aforesaid tenements on the day
on which he died, and that these tenements were taken into the lord
king's hand by the aforesaid inquisition, the lord king might be
pleased to order the seisin of the aforesaid tenements to be delivered
to them etc.
Whereupon a certain Hugh of Crepping appears. He says that the seisin
of the aforesaid tenements ought to be delivered to him, and not to
the aforesaid heirs. For he says that the aforesaid Nicholas was
seised of the same tenements, as of his right and inheritance, for a
long time, and that afterwards out of his seisin he enfeoffed the same
Hugh with the same tenements, to hold to him and to his heirs in
perpetuity, and put him in good and peaceful seisin of them a long
time before his death, which seisin the same Hugh continued during the
lifetime of the aforesaid Nicholas for a long time, and at the time of
his death and afterwards, until the same Hugh demised them to the
aforesaid Eve at the same Hugh's pleasure; and he says that it was in
this way that the aforesaid Eve died seised of the aforesaid
tenements. He also says that at the time when the aforesaid Nicholas
enfeoffed him of the aforesaid tenements, the same Hugh had a writ of
the lord king addressed to a certain William de St. Clair, then the
king's escheator, that he should allow him to enter the aforesaid
tenements, since they were held of the lord king in chief. And he
requests the lord king to be pleased to deliver seisin of his
aforesaid tenements to him etc.
And the aforesaid heirs say that, whatever has been found by the
aforesaid inquisition, or whatever the aforesaid Hugh says about the
aforesaid enfeoffment made to him by the aforesaid Nicholas, their
ancestor, or about the seisin delivered to him, the aforesaid Nicholas
never divested himself of the aforesaid tenements nor gave the
aforesaid Hugh any estate in them, but rather died seised of them in
his demesne as in fee and that they are his next heirs. And they
request that it be ascertained by a jury whether this be the case. And
Hugh likewise.
Appendix - vol.1, p.607
2. i) For the original inquisition post mortem authorised by a writ
of 16 January 1293 but not held until 12 April see CIPM, vol. III, no.
150
ii) The case was enrolled in King's Bench in Trinity term 1293 with
the heading Essex placitum missum de consilio, with some minor
differences in the text of the entry, omitting the final sentence and
with a sequel recorded: KB 27/137, mm. 17d-18
[the sequel as recorded in this entry]
On which day the parties appeared and also the jurors who say on their
oath that the said Nicholas Tregoze held the said tenements of the
lord king and gave them to Robert Burnel, late bishop of Bath and
Wells, to hold to himself and his heirs, who was peacefully seised of
them from the feast of Saint Barnabas to the First of August and then
the same bishop enfeoffed the said Nicholas and one Eve his wife of
the said manors, to be held to themselves and the heirs begotten of
their bodies; and, if the said Eve died without an heir begotten of
the said Nicholas, the same manors were to remain to the said Nicholas
and his heirs etc. They say that the same Nicholas, after long
possessing such seisin, demised the said manors subsequently to the
said bishop for a term of six years, and the same bishop demised the
manor of Blunt's Hall to Nicholas de Dyham and demised the other manor
of Tolleshunt to the vicar of the same village for a term of years.
They say that the said Nicholas Tregoze subsequently made a charter
for the said manors to the said Hugh and sent a certain John of Ewell
and Henry of Colne to put the same Hugh in seisin of the same
tenements and the said Hugh together with the said attorneys, John and
Henry, first came to the manor of Blunt's Hall and tried to enter it
but the said Nicholas de Dyham did not allow this, but closed the
doors so that they could not enter, and the said Hugh cut down a hedge
outside the manor house but did not carry it off or work or take any
thing of value because of the resistence of the said Nicholas de
Dyham, and they then went to the manor of Tolleshunt and with the
consent and agreement of the said attorneys he took the fealties of
some tenants of the same manor, namely of those who were willing to do
this without being forced, but he took no payment from them by way of
acknowledgement, nor did he take anything else of profit. Asked if the
said Hugh, whether in person or through another, took any profits or
otherwise used his seisin during the lifetime of Nicholas Tregoze they
say not. They explain that he neither ploughed, sowed, reaped nor took
any other profits because the farmers of the said bishop did not allow
him to do this. They say in addition that the said Hugh went to the
said bishop of Bath and Wells in Gascony and obtained there a letter
from the same bishop of credence, and before he returned the said
Nicholas Tregoze had died. And then the said Hugh began to act as
owner on his own authority in the said manors and to impede the seisin
of the said Eve, and so the said Eve brought an assize of novel
disseisin against the said Hugh and by reason of the feoffment of the
said manors made by the said bishop to the said Nicholas Tregoze and
Eve it was found by the said assize that the said Eve was never out of
seisin of the same tenements from the time of the said feoffment and
thus the said manors remained to the said Eve by judgment, as of those
of which she had been jointly enfeoffed with her husband by the
feoffment of the said bishop. Asked if the said Nicholas Tregoze and
Eve had died without heirs of their bodies they say yes. Also asked
whether the said Nicholas Tregoze died seised of the said tenements as
of fee etc., they say that they have told the truth of the matter and
request the assistance of the discretion of the justices. And for the
better information of the court the chancellor sent an inquisition
made by the king's order by Malcolm of Harley, his escheator this side
of the Trent, which inquisition with writ resides among the recorda of
this year, and which agrees in substance with the said verdict and by
which it is found that the said John de Boys, James of Burnham, John
of Loudham [with note at bottom of m. 17d 'Look on the following
membrane' and at top of m. 18: 'continuation of the Tregoze record']
and John Gernun, the nephews of the said Nicholas, are the next heirs
of the same Nicholas, to whom the same tenements ought revert. The
said John de Boys was of the age of twenty four at Easter last and the
said James was of the age of twenty six at the Purification of Saint
Mary last and John of Loudham was of the age of twenty two years at
Christmas last and John Gernun was of the age of twenty three at
Michaelmas last, so it seems to the court that seisin of the said
tenements should rather be handed over to the said parceners John,
James, John, and John from the hands of the lord king than to the said
Hugh. The said Malcolm, the escheator, is therefore instructed that,
after having taken a sufficient surety from the said parceners John,
James, John, and John, for payment of a reasonable relief to the lord
king for the said tenements, he is to hand over seisin of the same
tenements without delay to the same, without prejudice to the right of
anyone. The said John, James, John and John are told to perform homage
to the lord king for the said tenements etc.
On Jul 4, 3:11 am, suthen <sut...@redshift.com> wrote:
On Jul 1, 9:44 pm, m...@btinternet.com wrote:
1. Eustace de Loudham, Sheriff of Notts, ff 1226
2. Sir Walter de Loudham, dead by 1272
3. Sir Walter de Loudham, ff 1310; married a daughter of Geoffrey de
Tregoz
4. Sir John de Loudham, c1269 - 1318
In addition to providing this Sir John with a brother, the following
entry from the Diary of Abraham Pryme, an antiquarian collector of
deeds, paints an interesting picture of early 14th century life:
John de Loudham grants to William de Loudham, his brother, one Thomas
Locks of Wintringham [Lincs], "nativum meum de manerio meo de
Wintringham [my serf of my manor of Wintringham]", 7 July 1316
William de Loudham makes Thomas Locks free and manumits him from all
conditions of servitude absolutely and in perpetuity, 20 July 1316.
MAR
I don't have current access, but I believe that _The Grelseys of
Drakelowe_ places Hawise de Tregoz as daughter of Nicholas d. 1279
when in fact she would be his sister. Her husband ws Ralph de Gernon
of Easthorpe, Essex d. 1274 and she had two sons, John and Richard and
two daughters Alice (wife of Robert Baynard) and Margaret (wife of
Robert de Verley).
So Hawise may be the name of one of the four sisters of Nicholas.
HS- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-
Gjest
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
On 5 Jul., 00:21, Rosie Bevan <rbe...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
Many thanks, Rosie and Hap - brilliant work as usual.
Regards, Michael
This is indeed the case, Hap.
The following record gives the names of the four sisters of Nicholas.
Joan was evidently the wife of Walter de Loudham and mother of John de
Loudham.
Paul Brand (ed.).Parliament Rolls of Medieval England, 1275-1504, vol
1, p. 563
Many thanks, Rosie and Hap - brilliant work as usual.
Regards, Michael
-
Rosie Bevan
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
As I inadvertently omitted the fourth Tregoz nephew and heir in my
2002 post, I've compiled some further notes about the early Loudham
family, which as Michael has noted, is not well documented.
EUSTACE DE LOUDHAM
The father of Eustace de Ludham appears to have been named Herbert. In
1220 Eustace
made an agreement in the king's court over a charter of warranty in
Hertfordshire (place unnamed) with Philip son of Robert. In the two
entries he is referred to as Eustace de Ludham or Eustace son of
Herbert [CRR 1220, p.208, 217]. Eustace was under sheriff of Notts.,
in 1213, sheriff of Yorkshire in 1224/26 [CPR 1216-1225, p.524] (this
would indicate that he held lands in Yorkshire to qualify) and sheriff
of Notts in 1233. In 1216 on the petition of John de Lacy, constable
of Chester the king pardoned Eustace the arrears of a fine imposed on
him because he had been in rebellion with the constable. Eustace
obtained land in Thurgarton, Horspool, Hoveringham, Gonalston,
Southwell, Newark and Loudham, Notts., from Robert son of Roger de
Pascy, which were the lands of the late Elias de Pascy. These were
confirmed to him by Emma de Beaufou in 1235 [CChR, i, p.212]. Before
1216 he was given a toft in Radcliffe and common pasture for 60 sheep
by Hugh III de Hoveringham. He was a patron of Thurgarton priory
giving 2 shillings p.a. from rents in Horspool [Trevor Foulds (ed.),
The Thurgarton Cartulary, p.cvi, 8,9]. Eustace died after 1241 when he
was appointed to assess tallage in various northern counties with
Warner Engaine, [CPR 1232-47, p.263] but probably by 1242, when Walter
appears to have succeeded him. His wife is unknown.
WALTER DE LOUDHAM
Walter, his son, was steward of the Lacy barony of Pontefract [EYC
VIII, p.197] and in their service from before 1240. He gave the abbey
of Stanlaw (later Whalley abbey), one mark annually to be made on the
anniversary of the death of " dni Johnannis de Lascy quondam Comitis
Lyncoln." who died in 1240 and was buried there [W. A Hulton (ed.),
The Coucher Book of Whalley Abbey, vol. II, p.341]. The manors of
Lowdham and East Bridgeford, Nottinghamshire, were given by Ranulph,
Earl of Chester, to Henry de Lacy
for his service around 1143-1144 [Geoffrey Barraclough (ed.), The
Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, c.1071-1237, p.81],
which may account for Walter's service to the Lacy family. In 1244
Walter was holding in Carlton-in-Lindrick, Notts., 5 ¼ bovates of the
king's gift, and 8 shillings rent of a mill. In 1249 Walter was
exempted from certain duties while in the service of Edmund de Lacy by
the king, and given land in Riby, Lincolnshire, (1/13 fee) by
Margaret, Countess of Lincoln in 1254. In 1255 Walter was appointed by
the king to keep the manor of Gunthorpe with the soke of Lowdham and
the stock for seven years at a rent of 100 marks p.a. [CPR 1247-85, p.
447]. In 1258 he acted on behalf of Edmund de Lacy in the marriage
settlement of Henry de Lacy and Margaret Longespee.
E 326/194
Covenant between Edmund de Lacy, of the one part, and William
Lungeespee of
the other, viz. that in the octave of the Purification at London, the
said
E. deLacy will place himself at the disposition of his friends, i.e.
of his
mother and of Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester, Hugh Dispenser,
and
Walter de Ludham: and the said William Lungeespee will place himself
at the
disposition of Fulk Basset, Bishop of London, Stephen Lunge . . .,
Philip
Basset, and J . . . de Ar . . . del, for completing the marriage of
Henry,
son of E. de Lacy, and Margaret the daughter of W. Lungespeed, and
for
giving and receiving lands, &c. A.D. 1258
With Simon de Hedon, Walter was a commissioner holding several
inquisitions between 1259 and 1266 to determine the cause of certain
deaths, and presumably as a result of this service in 1268 they were
given joint custody and marriage of the heir of Hugh de Hercy, but
both Walter and Simon were dead before 16 Oct 1272. [CPR, 1272-1281,
p. 110]. Walter also had the custody of the lands of the heir of
Thomas de Riggeby until the heir was of age [Kirkyby's Inquest, p.
393]. This Walter had a daughter called Alice or Maud (Foulds seems
confused on this point), who shortly after Walter's death married John
de Heriz of Gonalston (d.1299) [Foulds, clviii, p.288 citing BL Loans
MS 29/60 fo. 159]. If mother of John's children, this makes her
ancestral to the Pierreponts of Holme Pierrepont and Annesleys of
Annesley. Of note Eustace de Ludham and his son Walter witnessed a
charter of Ivo de Heriz, grandfather of John de Heriz before 1225 [CPR
1324-1327, p. 189]. Walter's wife is unknown.
WALTER II DE LOUDHAM
Walter fitz Walter de Loudham was listed in new oblations for Notts.
and Derbyshire in the pipe rolls of 1275/6 [Yeatman, p.239]. He was
married to Joan daughter of Nicholas Tregoz, [Paul Brand
(ed.).Parliament Rolls of Medieval England, 1275-1504, vol 1, p. 563]
and was by 1267 lord of Bilsthorpe, Notts, where in 1272 he presented
to the advowson after the previous incumbent appointment by of
Nicholas Tregoz, died [The Register of Walter Giffard Lord Archbishop
of York 1266-1279, p.67]. He appears with another wife called Isabel,
in the pipe rolls of 31 Edward I for Notts. and Derbyshire (1302/1303)
[John Pym Yeatman, "Feudal Derbyshire" p.260]. He was dead by 19 June
1305 when John de Ludeham is recorded holding a quarter of a knight's
fee in Bilsthorpe [CR,1302-1307, p.273]. Father of John de Loudham
born c. 1271 (husband of Alice de Kirketon) and grandfather of John b
c. 1314 (husband of Isabel le Breton b.c. 1324) whose careers are
recorded in "Knights of Edward I".
Godfrey de Loudham, archbishop of York, (1258-1265) was undoubtedly
related to these Loudhams. Godfrey's parents were Richard de Loudham
and Eda. Godfrey also had a brother Thomas who was chaplain to the
Pope and prebendary at York & Southwell [Fasti Eboracenses, vol. 1, p.
300; CPR 1266-1272, p.259]. A Richard de Loudham and Agatha his wife
occur in the Thurgarton cartulary being given parcels of land in
Lowdham by John fitz Gilbert de Loudham. John's father, Gilbert de
Loudham, was a 'nepos' of Eustace de Loudham, but whether nephew,
grandson or other, it is difficult to tell.
Further indication of a relationship is given when Godfrey de Loudham,
then precentor of York, was the first witness of the deed between
Walter son of Eustace de Loudham and Elias de Midhop, in the deed
Michael mentioned in his post. This dates the deed from 1250 onwards
West Yorkshire Archive Service, Bradford: Spencer-Stanhope Manuscripts
SpSt/4/11/79/1
Between Walter de Loudham, son of Eustace de Loudham, of the one part,
and
Helyas de Midehop son of John de Midehop, of the other part; of the
Manor of
Langeside, with appurts on Billeclive, Penishall and Swindene, at a
rent of
£10 paid to Walter in the great church of St. Dionisius at Blida
(Blythe);
Helyas pledges his lands at Crisland in Meltham as security for the
rent of
£10.
Witnesses: Godfrey de Loudham, Precentor of York, John de Hoderode,
Seneschal of Pontefract, Ralf de Horebyri, Richard de Tankerley,
William de
Suttun, Robert de Ripariis, William de Peniston, Richard de Oxspring,
William de Denby, Richard de Kyminton, Ralf de Rye, Thomas de
Kyminton,
William de Sibbethorp, and others.
Seal: green wax, round, on tag; a standing figure carrying a scythe,
an hour
glass (?), and followed by an animal.
Legend: + S'WALTERI DE LOVDHAM.
Endorsed: Loudham. 200.
The wife of John III de Loudham (d. 1390) is not given in Thoroton's
pedigree, but she was Margaret (d. 1451) dau of Sir John Burgh of
Walton, Yorks, and Katherine Engaine.
Alice de Loudham, sister of John III de Loudham, who died without
issue, was wife of Thomas de la Ryvere, son and heir of Richard de la
Ryvere and Maud de Heriz, heiress of Gonalston
To summarise.
1.Herbert
2.Eustace fitz Herbert de Loudham fl. 1213, d.c 1241
3. Walter de Loudham fl c.1225, d.c 1272
3. Walter de Loudham d.c.1303
+ Joan Tregoz
4. John de Loudham b.c.1270-1318
+ Alice de Kirketon
5. John de Loudham b.c.1314-c.1387
+ Isabel le Breton
6. John de Loudham d.s.p.1390
+ Margaret de Burgh d.1449, married 2ndly John la Zouche of
Kirtlington, had issue
6.Isabel de Loudham
+ Thomas Bekering
7. Alice Bekering
+ Sir Thomas Rempston
8. Elizabeth Rempston
+ John Cheyney
8. Isabel Rempston
+ Sir Brian Stapleton
8. Margaret Rempston
+ Richard Bingham
6. Margaret de Loudham
+ Thomas Foljambe
6. Alice de Loudham d.s.p.
+ Thomas de la Ryvere
3.Alice/Maud de Loudham
+ John de Heriz
4. William de Loudham
5.Joan de Loudham
+Sir Geoffrey de Staunton
While searching early records care is needed not to confuse the
Ludhams of Ludham, Norfolk with these Loudhams, and caution is needed
with Knights of Edward I, which conflates the two Walters.
Other Loudhams occur in the Notts. locality in the 1200-1300s, with
names such as Gervase, Elias, Peter, Henry, John, Gilbert, Richard,
Hugh, Simon. Joan de Loudham was prioress of Catesby between
1311-1338.
Rosie
On Jul 5, 9:36 pm, m...@btinternet.com wrote:
2002 post, I've compiled some further notes about the early Loudham
family, which as Michael has noted, is not well documented.
EUSTACE DE LOUDHAM
The father of Eustace de Ludham appears to have been named Herbert. In
1220 Eustace
made an agreement in the king's court over a charter of warranty in
Hertfordshire (place unnamed) with Philip son of Robert. In the two
entries he is referred to as Eustace de Ludham or Eustace son of
Herbert [CRR 1220, p.208, 217]. Eustace was under sheriff of Notts.,
in 1213, sheriff of Yorkshire in 1224/26 [CPR 1216-1225, p.524] (this
would indicate that he held lands in Yorkshire to qualify) and sheriff
of Notts in 1233. In 1216 on the petition of John de Lacy, constable
of Chester the king pardoned Eustace the arrears of a fine imposed on
him because he had been in rebellion with the constable. Eustace
obtained land in Thurgarton, Horspool, Hoveringham, Gonalston,
Southwell, Newark and Loudham, Notts., from Robert son of Roger de
Pascy, which were the lands of the late Elias de Pascy. These were
confirmed to him by Emma de Beaufou in 1235 [CChR, i, p.212]. Before
1216 he was given a toft in Radcliffe and common pasture for 60 sheep
by Hugh III de Hoveringham. He was a patron of Thurgarton priory
giving 2 shillings p.a. from rents in Horspool [Trevor Foulds (ed.),
The Thurgarton Cartulary, p.cvi, 8,9]. Eustace died after 1241 when he
was appointed to assess tallage in various northern counties with
Warner Engaine, [CPR 1232-47, p.263] but probably by 1242, when Walter
appears to have succeeded him. His wife is unknown.
WALTER DE LOUDHAM
Walter, his son, was steward of the Lacy barony of Pontefract [EYC
VIII, p.197] and in their service from before 1240. He gave the abbey
of Stanlaw (later Whalley abbey), one mark annually to be made on the
anniversary of the death of " dni Johnannis de Lascy quondam Comitis
Lyncoln." who died in 1240 and was buried there [W. A Hulton (ed.),
The Coucher Book of Whalley Abbey, vol. II, p.341]. The manors of
Lowdham and East Bridgeford, Nottinghamshire, were given by Ranulph,
Earl of Chester, to Henry de Lacy
for his service around 1143-1144 [Geoffrey Barraclough (ed.), The
Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, c.1071-1237, p.81],
which may account for Walter's service to the Lacy family. In 1244
Walter was holding in Carlton-in-Lindrick, Notts., 5 ¼ bovates of the
king's gift, and 8 shillings rent of a mill. In 1249 Walter was
exempted from certain duties while in the service of Edmund de Lacy by
the king, and given land in Riby, Lincolnshire, (1/13 fee) by
Margaret, Countess of Lincoln in 1254. In 1255 Walter was appointed by
the king to keep the manor of Gunthorpe with the soke of Lowdham and
the stock for seven years at a rent of 100 marks p.a. [CPR 1247-85, p.
447]. In 1258 he acted on behalf of Edmund de Lacy in the marriage
settlement of Henry de Lacy and Margaret Longespee.
E 326/194
Covenant between Edmund de Lacy, of the one part, and William
Lungeespee of
the other, viz. that in the octave of the Purification at London, the
said
E. deLacy will place himself at the disposition of his friends, i.e.
of his
mother and of Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester, Hugh Dispenser,
and
Walter de Ludham: and the said William Lungeespee will place himself
at the
disposition of Fulk Basset, Bishop of London, Stephen Lunge . . .,
Philip
Basset, and J . . . de Ar . . . del, for completing the marriage of
Henry,
son of E. de Lacy, and Margaret the daughter of W. Lungespeed, and
for
giving and receiving lands, &c. A.D. 1258
With Simon de Hedon, Walter was a commissioner holding several
inquisitions between 1259 and 1266 to determine the cause of certain
deaths, and presumably as a result of this service in 1268 they were
given joint custody and marriage of the heir of Hugh de Hercy, but
both Walter and Simon were dead before 16 Oct 1272. [CPR, 1272-1281,
p. 110]. Walter also had the custody of the lands of the heir of
Thomas de Riggeby until the heir was of age [Kirkyby's Inquest, p.
393]. This Walter had a daughter called Alice or Maud (Foulds seems
confused on this point), who shortly after Walter's death married John
de Heriz of Gonalston (d.1299) [Foulds, clviii, p.288 citing BL Loans
MS 29/60 fo. 159]. If mother of John's children, this makes her
ancestral to the Pierreponts of Holme Pierrepont and Annesleys of
Annesley. Of note Eustace de Ludham and his son Walter witnessed a
charter of Ivo de Heriz, grandfather of John de Heriz before 1225 [CPR
1324-1327, p. 189]. Walter's wife is unknown.
WALTER II DE LOUDHAM
Walter fitz Walter de Loudham was listed in new oblations for Notts.
and Derbyshire in the pipe rolls of 1275/6 [Yeatman, p.239]. He was
married to Joan daughter of Nicholas Tregoz, [Paul Brand
(ed.).Parliament Rolls of Medieval England, 1275-1504, vol 1, p. 563]
and was by 1267 lord of Bilsthorpe, Notts, where in 1272 he presented
to the advowson after the previous incumbent appointment by of
Nicholas Tregoz, died [The Register of Walter Giffard Lord Archbishop
of York 1266-1279, p.67]. He appears with another wife called Isabel,
in the pipe rolls of 31 Edward I for Notts. and Derbyshire (1302/1303)
[John Pym Yeatman, "Feudal Derbyshire" p.260]. He was dead by 19 June
1305 when John de Ludeham is recorded holding a quarter of a knight's
fee in Bilsthorpe [CR,1302-1307, p.273]. Father of John de Loudham
born c. 1271 (husband of Alice de Kirketon) and grandfather of John b
c. 1314 (husband of Isabel le Breton b.c. 1324) whose careers are
recorded in "Knights of Edward I".
Godfrey de Loudham, archbishop of York, (1258-1265) was undoubtedly
related to these Loudhams. Godfrey's parents were Richard de Loudham
and Eda. Godfrey also had a brother Thomas who was chaplain to the
Pope and prebendary at York & Southwell [Fasti Eboracenses, vol. 1, p.
300; CPR 1266-1272, p.259]. A Richard de Loudham and Agatha his wife
occur in the Thurgarton cartulary being given parcels of land in
Lowdham by John fitz Gilbert de Loudham. John's father, Gilbert de
Loudham, was a 'nepos' of Eustace de Loudham, but whether nephew,
grandson or other, it is difficult to tell.
Further indication of a relationship is given when Godfrey de Loudham,
then precentor of York, was the first witness of the deed between
Walter son of Eustace de Loudham and Elias de Midhop, in the deed
Michael mentioned in his post. This dates the deed from 1250 onwards
West Yorkshire Archive Service, Bradford: Spencer-Stanhope Manuscripts
SpSt/4/11/79/1
Between Walter de Loudham, son of Eustace de Loudham, of the one part,
and
Helyas de Midehop son of John de Midehop, of the other part; of the
Manor of
Langeside, with appurts on Billeclive, Penishall and Swindene, at a
rent of
£10 paid to Walter in the great church of St. Dionisius at Blida
(Blythe);
Helyas pledges his lands at Crisland in Meltham as security for the
rent of
£10.
Witnesses: Godfrey de Loudham, Precentor of York, John de Hoderode,
Seneschal of Pontefract, Ralf de Horebyri, Richard de Tankerley,
William de
Suttun, Robert de Ripariis, William de Peniston, Richard de Oxspring,
William de Denby, Richard de Kyminton, Ralf de Rye, Thomas de
Kyminton,
William de Sibbethorp, and others.
Seal: green wax, round, on tag; a standing figure carrying a scythe,
an hour
glass (?), and followed by an animal.
Legend: + S'WALTERI DE LOVDHAM.
Endorsed: Loudham. 200.
The wife of John III de Loudham (d. 1390) is not given in Thoroton's
pedigree, but she was Margaret (d. 1451) dau of Sir John Burgh of
Walton, Yorks, and Katherine Engaine.
Alice de Loudham, sister of John III de Loudham, who died without
issue, was wife of Thomas de la Ryvere, son and heir of Richard de la
Ryvere and Maud de Heriz, heiress of Gonalston
To summarise.
1.Herbert
2.Eustace fitz Herbert de Loudham fl. 1213, d.c 1241
3. Walter de Loudham fl c.1225, d.c 1272
3. Walter de Loudham d.c.1303
+ Joan Tregoz
4. John de Loudham b.c.1270-1318
+ Alice de Kirketon
5. John de Loudham b.c.1314-c.1387
+ Isabel le Breton
6. John de Loudham d.s.p.1390
+ Margaret de Burgh d.1449, married 2ndly John la Zouche of
Kirtlington, had issue
6.Isabel de Loudham
+ Thomas Bekering
7. Alice Bekering
+ Sir Thomas Rempston
8. Elizabeth Rempston
+ John Cheyney
8. Isabel Rempston
+ Sir Brian Stapleton
8. Margaret Rempston
+ Richard Bingham
6. Margaret de Loudham
+ Thomas Foljambe
6. Alice de Loudham d.s.p.
+ Thomas de la Ryvere
3.Alice/Maud de Loudham
+ John de Heriz
4. William de Loudham
5.Joan de Loudham
+Sir Geoffrey de Staunton
While searching early records care is needed not to confuse the
Ludhams of Ludham, Norfolk with these Loudhams, and caution is needed
with Knights of Edward I, which conflates the two Walters.
Other Loudhams occur in the Notts. locality in the 1200-1300s, with
names such as Gervase, Elias, Peter, Henry, John, Gilbert, Richard,
Hugh, Simon. Joan de Loudham was prioress of Catesby between
1311-1338.
Rosie
On Jul 5, 9:36 pm, m...@btinternet.com wrote:
On 5 Jul., 00:21, Rosie Bevan <rbe...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
This is indeed the case, Hap.
The following record gives the names of the four sisters of Nicholas.
Joan was evidently the wife of Walter de Loudham and mother of John de
Loudham.
Paul Brand (ed.).Parliament Rolls of Medieval England, 1275-1504, vol
1, p. 563
Many thanks, Rosie and Hap - brilliant work as usual.
Regards, Michael
-
Gjest
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
On 6 Jul., 09:49, Rosie Bevan <rbe...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
Wow - many thanks, Rosie.
A couple of slight additions:
(a) William de Loudham, the brother of Sir John (c1270-1314) was
probably the clergyman of that name presented by Sir John to the
church of Bilsthorpe (Register of William Greenfield, Archbishop of
York, 1306-1315, p 48, #1768), and possibly the incumbent of Knaptoft,
Leics, of that name, mentioned in the Somerset Feet of Fines for 11
Edward II.
(b) Sir John III (d 1390) appears to have married twice, the first
time, at a young age, to a Katherine:
"John de Kirketon, knight, to settle the manor of Tumby on himself and
Isabel his wife for their lives, remainder to John de Loudham, knight,
for life, remainder to John, son of the said John de Loudham,
Katherine his wife and the heirs of their bodies, remainder to the
said John de Loudham and his heirs, retaining the manor of Ashby
Puerorum, Lincoln: 36 Edward III [1362-3] (PRO C143/342/16).
MA-R
To summarise.
1.Herbert
2.Eustace fitz Herbert de Loudham fl. 1213, d.c 1241
3. Walter de Loudham fl c.1225, d.c 1272
3. Walter de Loudham d.c.1303
+ Joan Tregoz
4. John de Loudham b.c.1270-1318
+ Alice de Kirketon
5. John de Loudham b.c.1314-c.1387
+ Isabel le Breton
6. John de Loudham d.s.p.1390
+ Margaret de Burgh d.1449, married 2ndly John la Zouche of
Kirtlington, had issue
6.Isabel de Loudham
+ Thomas Bekering
7. Alice Bekering
+ Sir Thomas Rempston
8. Elizabeth Rempston
+ John Cheyney
8. Isabel Rempston
+ Sir Brian Stapleton
8. Margaret Rempston
+ Richard Bingham
6. Margaret de Loudham
+ Thomas Foljambe
6. Alice de Loudham d.s.p.
+ Thomas de la Ryvere
3.Alice/Maud de Loudham
+ John de Heriz
4. William de Loudham
5.Joan de Loudham
+Sir Geoffrey de Staunton
Wow - many thanks, Rosie.
A couple of slight additions:
(a) William de Loudham, the brother of Sir John (c1270-1314) was
probably the clergyman of that name presented by Sir John to the
church of Bilsthorpe (Register of William Greenfield, Archbishop of
York, 1306-1315, p 48, #1768), and possibly the incumbent of Knaptoft,
Leics, of that name, mentioned in the Somerset Feet of Fines for 11
Edward II.
(b) Sir John III (d 1390) appears to have married twice, the first
time, at a young age, to a Katherine:
"John de Kirketon, knight, to settle the manor of Tumby on himself and
Isabel his wife for their lives, remainder to John de Loudham, knight,
for life, remainder to John, son of the said John de Loudham,
Katherine his wife and the heirs of their bodies, remainder to the
said John de Loudham and his heirs, retaining the manor of Ashby
Puerorum, Lincoln: 36 Edward III [1362-3] (PRO C143/342/16).
MA-R
-
Rosie Bevan
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
Thanks for those additional details, Michael. I wouldn't be surprised
if John I de Loudham had a previous marriage either. His son and heir
was born when he was in his mid forties and Alice de Kirketon was
considerably younger than he.
The descent from Maud/Alice de Loudham to the Pierreponts and
Annesleys is as follows. The Pierreponts are ancestral to many
Derbyshire and Notts. families, and the Annesley line decends to the
Viscounts Chaworths and Chaworths of Wiverton, as well as many others.
1. John II de Heriz d.1299
+Maud de Loudham d. aft 1299
2.John III de Loudham d.1329
3.Maud de Heriz
+ Richard de la Ryvere
4. Margaret de la Ryvere, the elder
+ Thomas Beler
4. Margaret de Ryvere, the younger
+ Roger Beler
2.Sarah de Heriz , brought manor at Rolleston in free marriage
+ Sir Robert de Pierrepont of Holme Pierrepont d.1334
3. Sir Henry Pierrepont d.v.p.
+ Margaret da William fitz William, had issue
3. Annora de Pierrepont d.1336
+ John de Annesley of Annesley
4. Sir John Annesley d. 1357, had issue
Annora de Pierrepont (named after her paternal grandmother Annora de
Manvers who brought the manor of Holme to the Pierreponts), carried
Maud de Loudham's dowry of property in Lowdham to the Annesley family
as is evident by a 1324 fine. Annora's stepmother was Cecily, daughter
of Sir John de Annesley, presumably Annora's father-in-law.
Cheers
Rosie
On Jul 7, 1:16 am, m...@btinternet.com wrote:
if John I de Loudham had a previous marriage either. His son and heir
was born when he was in his mid forties and Alice de Kirketon was
considerably younger than he.
The descent from Maud/Alice de Loudham to the Pierreponts and
Annesleys is as follows. The Pierreponts are ancestral to many
Derbyshire and Notts. families, and the Annesley line decends to the
Viscounts Chaworths and Chaworths of Wiverton, as well as many others.
1. John II de Heriz d.1299
+Maud de Loudham d. aft 1299
2.John III de Loudham d.1329
3.Maud de Heriz
+ Richard de la Ryvere
4. Margaret de la Ryvere, the elder
+ Thomas Beler
4. Margaret de Ryvere, the younger
+ Roger Beler
2.Sarah de Heriz , brought manor at Rolleston in free marriage
+ Sir Robert de Pierrepont of Holme Pierrepont d.1334
3. Sir Henry Pierrepont d.v.p.
+ Margaret da William fitz William, had issue
3. Annora de Pierrepont d.1336
+ John de Annesley of Annesley
4. Sir John Annesley d. 1357, had issue
Annora de Pierrepont (named after her paternal grandmother Annora de
Manvers who brought the manor of Holme to the Pierreponts), carried
Maud de Loudham's dowry of property in Lowdham to the Annesley family
as is evident by a 1324 fine. Annora's stepmother was Cecily, daughter
of Sir John de Annesley, presumably Annora's father-in-law.
Cheers
Rosie
On Jul 7, 1:16 am, m...@btinternet.com wrote:
On 6 Jul., 09:49, Rosie Bevan <rbe...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
To summarise.
1.Herbert
2.Eustace fitz Herbert de Loudham fl. 1213, d.c 1241
3. Walter de Loudham fl c.1225, d.c 1272
3. Walter de Loudham d.c.1303
+ Joan Tregoz
4. John de Loudham b.c.1270-1318
+ Alice de Kirketon
5. John de Loudham b.c.1314-c.1387
+ Isabel le Breton
6. John de Loudham d.s.p.1390
+ Margaret de Burgh d.1449, married 2ndly John la Zouche of
Kirtlington, had issue
6.Isabel de Loudham
+ Thomas Bekering
7. Alice Bekering
+ Sir Thomas Rempston
8. Elizabeth Rempston
+ John Cheyney
8. Isabel Rempston
+ Sir Brian Stapleton
8. Margaret Rempston
+ Richard Bingham
6. Margaret de Loudham
+ Thomas Foljambe
6. Alice de Loudham d.s.p.
+ Thomas de la Ryvere
3.Alice/Maud de Loudham
+ John de Heriz
4. William de Loudham
5.Joan de Loudham
+Sir Geoffrey de Staunton
Wow - many thanks, Rosie.
A couple of slight additions:
(a) William de Loudham, the brother of Sir John (c1270-1314) was
probably the clergyman of that name presented by Sir John to the
church of Bilsthorpe (Register of William Greenfield, Archbishop of
York, 1306-1315, p 48, #1768), and possibly the incumbent of Knaptoft,
Leics, of that name, mentioned in the Somerset Feet of Fines for 11
Edward II.
(b) Sir John III (d 1390) appears to have married twice, the first
time, at a young age, to a Katherine:
"John de Kirketon, knight, to settle the manor of Tumby on himself and
Isabel his wife for their lives, remainder to John de Loudham, knight,
for life, remainder to John, son of the said John de Loudham,
Katherine his wife and the heirs of their bodies, remainder to the
said John de Loudham and his heirs, retaining the manor of Ashby
Puerorum, Lincoln: 36 Edward III [1362-3] (PRO C143/342/16).
MA-R- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-
Gjest
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
On 8 Jul., 01:15, Rosie Bevan <rbe...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
Including, via the Cavendish-Bentincks, the late Queen Elizabeth the
Queen Mother.
Thanks, Rosie.
MA-R
Thanks for those additional details, Michael. I wouldn't be surprised
if John I de Loudham had a previous marriage either. His son and heir
was born when he was in his mid forties and Alice de Kirketon was
considerably younger than he.
The descent from Maud/Alice de Loudham to the Pierreponts and
Annesleys is as follows. The Pierreponts are ancestral to many
Derbyshire and Notts. families, and the Annesley line decends to the
Viscounts Chaworths and Chaworths of Wiverton, as well as many others.
1. John II de Heriz d.1299
+Maud de Loudham d. aft 1299
2.John III de Heriz d.1329
3.Maud de Heriz
+ Richard de la Ryvere
4. Margaret de la Ryvere, the elder
+ Thomas Beler
4. Margaret de Ryvere, the younger
+ Roger Beler
2.Sarah de Heriz , brought manor at Rolleston in free marriage
+ Sir Robert de Pierrepont of Holme Pierrepont d.1334
3. Sir Henry Pierrepont d.v.p.
+ Margaret da William fitz William, had issue
Including, via the Cavendish-Bentincks, the late Queen Elizabeth the
Queen Mother.
Thanks, Rosie.
MA-R
-
alden@mindspring.com
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
HI Rosie
Great work as always. I am confused by the 2. John III de Loudham d.
1329. I do not see this individual in the other stemmas. Is this
anew discovery?
Doug Smith
Great work as always. I am confused by the 2. John III de Loudham d.
1329. I do not see this individual in the other stemmas. Is this
anew discovery?
Doug Smith
"1. John II de Heriz d.1299
+Maud de Loudham d. aft 1299
2.John III de Loudham d.1329
3.Maud de Heriz
+ Richard de la Ryvere
4. Margaret de la Ryvere, the elder
+ Thomas Beler
4. Margaret de Ryvere, the younger
+ Roger Beler
2.Sarah de Heriz , brought manor at Rolleston in free marriage
+ Sir Robert de Pierrepont of Holme Pierrepont d.1334
3. Sir Henry Pierrepont d.v.p.
+ Margaret da William fitz William, had issue
3. Annora de Pierrepont d.1336
+ John de Annesley of Annesley
4. Sir John Annesley d. 1357, had issue"
-
Rosie Bevan
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
Dear Doug
Thanks for spotting that error
For Sir John III Loudham (d.1329), please read Sir John III de Heriz
(d.1329).
Cheers
Rosie
On Jul 9, 1:47 am, "a...@mindspring.com" <a...@mindspring.com> wrote:
Thanks for spotting that error
For Sir John III Loudham (d.1329), please read Sir John III de Heriz
(d.1329).
Cheers
Rosie
On Jul 9, 1:47 am, "a...@mindspring.com" <a...@mindspring.com> wrote:
HI Rosie
Great work as always. I am confused by the 2. John III de Loudham d.
1329. I do not see this individual in the other stemmas. Is this
anew discovery?
Doug Smith
"1. John II de Heriz d.1299
+Maud de Loudham d. aft 1299
2.John III de Loudham d.1329
3.Maud de Heriz
+ Richard de la Ryvere
4. Margaret de la Ryvere, the elder
+ Thomas Beler
4. Margaret de Ryvere, the younger
+ Roger Beler
2.Sarah de Heriz , brought manor at Rolleston in free marriage
+ Sir Robert de Pierrepont of Holme Pierrepont d.1334
3. Sir Henry Pierrepont d.v.p.
+ Margaret da William fitz William, had issue
3. Annora de Pierrepont d.1336
+ John de Annesley of Annesley
4. Sir John Annesley d. 1357, had issue"- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-
alden@mindspring.com
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
Hi Hal
The way I have it (at the moment) has an additional generation:
192.John Annesley (d. 1316)
193. Annora de Pierrepont (d. 1336)
386. Robert de Pierrepont (d. 1334)
387. Sarah Heriz
Much of this comes from Rosie's excellent posts if I understood them
correctly.
Doug Smith
The way I have it (at the moment) has an additional generation:
24. Sir John Annesley (dvp)
25.
...
48. Sir John Annesley (d. bef 12 Feb1410
49. Isabel Damory
...
96. Sir John Annesley (d. 25 jun 1357)
97.
192.John Annesley (d. 1316)
193. Annora de Pierrepont (d. 1336)
386. Robert de Pierrepont (d. 1334)
387. Sarah Heriz
...
Much of this comes from Rosie's excellent posts if I understood them
correctly.
Doug Smith
-
alden@mindspring.com
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
On Jul 9, 6:55 pm, "a...@mindspring.com" <a...@mindspring.com> wrote:
That said, the chronology appears very difficult.
DS
Hi Hal
The way I have it (at the moment) has an additional generation:
24. Sir John Annesley (dvp)
25.
...
48. Sir John Annesley (d. bef 12 Feb1410
49. Isabel Damory
...
96. Sir John Annesley (d. 25 jun 1357)
97.
192.John Annesley (d. 1316)
193. Annora de Pierrepont (d. 1336)
386. Robert de Pierrepont (d. 1334)
387. Sarah Heriz
...
Much of this comes from Rosie's excellent posts if I understood them
correctly.
Doug Smith
That said, the chronology appears very difficult.
DS
-
Rosie Bevan
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
Dear Hal
You are absolutely correct regarding the Annesley line - the 1324 fine
I mentioned includes Annora and her husband, which clearly means he
was the John who died in 1357, not earlier. The Annesley line could
well do with a revisit, now that sources are more accessible since my
initial post in 2001. Much source material has also been posted to
sgm, especially by Ronny Bodine. The Annesleys were a prolific family
with at least 5 cadet branches occurring in the 1300s, so they are
hard to untangle.
Sir Robert Pierpont had two wives, Sarah Heriz and Cecily de Annesley.
By the latter he had 14 children, of whom, Robert the eldest died
s.p., Roger was settled at Langford, Notts., and Margaret (d.1340) was
wife of Sir Gervase Clifton (d.1389) according to Payling, p.238. A
Cecily de Annesley occurs in 1317 when, "Alexander son of John de
Annesley, Reginald and Hugh his brothers and Cecily sister of the said
Hugh", and others broke into the park of Richard de Grey at Codnor,
Derbyshire [Pat. R, 1317-1321, p.87].
1. Sir Henry Pierpont
+ Annora Manvers (1247-1314
2. Sir Robert Pierpont (d.1334)
+Sarah Heriz b. c. 1273/78
3. Annora Pierpont b.c. 1293-1336
+ Sir John Annesley of Annesley c.1290-1357
4. Sir John Annesley
As well as his son and heir, Sir John (d.1357) had a daughter,
Elizabeth, born in 1313, according to evidence he gave for a proof of
age in 1334, but there were other children born to this couple.
The following is the Pierrepont line,
1.Sir Henry Pierpont
+ Annora (1247-1314) dau. & h. Sir Michael Manvers (d.1255) of Holme
Pierrepont
2.Sir Robert Pierpont (d.1334) of Holme Pierrepont
+ Sarah d of Sir John Heriz
3.Sir Henry Pierpont d.v.p.
+ Margaret dau Sir William FitzWilliam of Sprotborough
4. Henry Pierpont d.s.p.
4. Sir Edmund Pierpont (d.1370)
+ Joan dau. of Sir George Monboucher (d.1349) of Gamston,
Notts
5.Sir Edmund Pierpont (d.1425)
+ Frances, dau William Frank of Grimsby, Lincs
6.Sir Henry Pierpont (d.1452)
+ Ellen dau of Sir Nicholas Longford (d. 1401) of
Longford, Derbs.
7. Henry Pierpont (d.1457)
+ Thomasia dau Sir John Melton (d.1455) of
Aston, Yorks
8. Sir Henry Pierpont (d.s.p.1499)
+ dau. of Roos of Ingmanthorpe
8. Francis Pierpont
+ Margaret dau. John Burdon,
9. Sir William Pierpont
+ Joan dau. Sir Richard Empson
10. Sir George Pierpont
+ Winifrid d & h Sir William
Thwaites
11. Sir Henry Pierrepont
+ Frances Cavendish
12. Robert Pierrepont,
Earl of Kingston
+ Gertrude Talbot
|
This leads on to the Cavendish-Bentincks as per Michael's post. You
can see how on Leo's Genealogics database http://www.genealogics.org. As yet
the first 5 generations have not yet been entered.
The Heriz of Gonalston family is outlined in Foulds, Thurgarton
Cartulary, p.cxlvi-clvii
1. Robert I de Heriz d by 1128 of Tibshelf, Stapleford, Oxcroft held
of William Peverel. Benefactor of Lenten priory. Sheriff of Notts. and
Derbys. 1110-1114.
2. Ivo I de Heriz, Sheriff Notts. and Derbys. 1128-30
+ Emma de Gonalston
3. William de Heriz d1179 lands confiscated
3.Robert II de Heriz d.1198 paid relief in 1181 to have lands of his
brother
+ Agnes Alcher
4 Ivo II de Heriz d.1225
+ Hawise Briverre
5. John I de Heriz d. 1241
+ Sarah (she married secondly Jollan de Neville)
6.Henry de Heriz d.s.p.1273
6. John II de Heriz d.1299
+ Maud de Loudham
7.John III de Heriz d.1329 [CIPM VII no.234]
8. Maud de Heriz
+ Richard de la Riviere, had issue
7. Sarah de Heriz
+ Robert de Pierpont
7. Joan
Richard and Maud de la Riviere had a daughter and heir, Margaret, who
was wife of Roger Belers. They in turn had one daughter, Margaret,
wife of Robert de Swillington, senior advisor and chamberlain to John
of Gaunt. They in turn had a grand daughter and heir, Margaret,
(daughter of their son Roger) who became wife of Sir John Grey of
Ingleby, Lincs. but died without issue in 1429 [CIPM XXIII, nos
400-409]. I can elaborate on this descent if anyone is interested.
Gonalston and other Heriz lands reverted to Ralph de Cromwell under a
1325 settlement. He was descended from Avice Belers sister of Roger
Belers, and so the property was alienated away from any family member
with a genetic investment in it.
I hope this helps clear up any problems.
Cheers
Rosie
On Jul 10, 10:16 am, "Hal Bradley" <hw.brad...@verizon.net> wrote:
You are absolutely correct regarding the Annesley line - the 1324 fine
I mentioned includes Annora and her husband, which clearly means he
was the John who died in 1357, not earlier. The Annesley line could
well do with a revisit, now that sources are more accessible since my
initial post in 2001. Much source material has also been posted to
sgm, especially by Ronny Bodine. The Annesleys were a prolific family
with at least 5 cadet branches occurring in the 1300s, so they are
hard to untangle.
Sir Robert Pierpont had two wives, Sarah Heriz and Cecily de Annesley.
By the latter he had 14 children, of whom, Robert the eldest died
s.p., Roger was settled at Langford, Notts., and Margaret (d.1340) was
wife of Sir Gervase Clifton (d.1389) according to Payling, p.238. A
Cecily de Annesley occurs in 1317 when, "Alexander son of John de
Annesley, Reginald and Hugh his brothers and Cecily sister of the said
Hugh", and others broke into the park of Richard de Grey at Codnor,
Derbyshire [Pat. R, 1317-1321, p.87].
1. Sir Henry Pierpont
+ Annora Manvers (1247-1314
2. Sir Robert Pierpont (d.1334)
+Sarah Heriz b. c. 1273/78
3. Annora Pierpont b.c. 1293-1336
+ Sir John Annesley of Annesley c.1290-1357
4. Sir John Annesley
As well as his son and heir, Sir John (d.1357) had a daughter,
Elizabeth, born in 1313, according to evidence he gave for a proof of
age in 1334, but there were other children born to this couple.
The following is the Pierrepont line,
1.Sir Henry Pierpont
+ Annora (1247-1314) dau. & h. Sir Michael Manvers (d.1255) of Holme
Pierrepont
2.Sir Robert Pierpont (d.1334) of Holme Pierrepont
+ Sarah d of Sir John Heriz
3.Sir Henry Pierpont d.v.p.
+ Margaret dau Sir William FitzWilliam of Sprotborough
4. Henry Pierpont d.s.p.
4. Sir Edmund Pierpont (d.1370)
+ Joan dau. of Sir George Monboucher (d.1349) of Gamston,
Notts
5.Sir Edmund Pierpont (d.1425)
+ Frances, dau William Frank of Grimsby, Lincs
6.Sir Henry Pierpont (d.1452)
+ Ellen dau of Sir Nicholas Longford (d. 1401) of
Longford, Derbs.
7. Henry Pierpont (d.1457)
+ Thomasia dau Sir John Melton (d.1455) of
Aston, Yorks
8. Sir Henry Pierpont (d.s.p.1499)
+ dau. of Roos of Ingmanthorpe
8. Francis Pierpont
+ Margaret dau. John Burdon,
9. Sir William Pierpont
+ Joan dau. Sir Richard Empson
10. Sir George Pierpont
+ Winifrid d & h Sir William
Thwaites
11. Sir Henry Pierrepont
+ Frances Cavendish
12. Robert Pierrepont,
Earl of Kingston
+ Gertrude Talbot
|
This leads on to the Cavendish-Bentincks as per Michael's post. You
can see how on Leo's Genealogics database http://www.genealogics.org. As yet
the first 5 generations have not yet been entered.
The Heriz of Gonalston family is outlined in Foulds, Thurgarton
Cartulary, p.cxlvi-clvii
1. Robert I de Heriz d by 1128 of Tibshelf, Stapleford, Oxcroft held
of William Peverel. Benefactor of Lenten priory. Sheriff of Notts. and
Derbys. 1110-1114.
2. Ivo I de Heriz, Sheriff Notts. and Derbys. 1128-30
+ Emma de Gonalston
3. William de Heriz d1179 lands confiscated
3.Robert II de Heriz d.1198 paid relief in 1181 to have lands of his
brother
+ Agnes Alcher
4 Ivo II de Heriz d.1225
+ Hawise Briverre
5. John I de Heriz d. 1241
+ Sarah (she married secondly Jollan de Neville)
6.Henry de Heriz d.s.p.1273
6. John II de Heriz d.1299
+ Maud de Loudham
7.John III de Heriz d.1329 [CIPM VII no.234]
8. Maud de Heriz
+ Richard de la Riviere, had issue
7. Sarah de Heriz
+ Robert de Pierpont
7. Joan
Richard and Maud de la Riviere had a daughter and heir, Margaret, who
was wife of Roger Belers. They in turn had one daughter, Margaret,
wife of Robert de Swillington, senior advisor and chamberlain to John
of Gaunt. They in turn had a grand daughter and heir, Margaret,
(daughter of their son Roger) who became wife of Sir John Grey of
Ingleby, Lincs. but died without issue in 1429 [CIPM XXIII, nos
400-409]. I can elaborate on this descent if anyone is interested.
Gonalston and other Heriz lands reverted to Ralph de Cromwell under a
1325 settlement. He was descended from Avice Belers sister of Roger
Belers, and so the property was alienated away from any family member
with a genetic investment in it.
I hope this helps clear up any problems.
Cheers
Rosie
On Jul 10, 10:16 am, "Hal Bradley" <hw.brad...@verizon.net> wrote:
Rosie & Michael,
Thanks for the discussion of this line. Could you provide a summary of the
Annesley & Pierrepont lines? If Annora de Pierrepont is the daughter of Sir
Robert de Pierrepont, I cannot get the chronology to work. Is it possible
she was the wife of Sir John de Annesley (d. 1357) rather than his father?
Working from Sir Hugh Willoughby (b. c. 1393) through his mother Isabel
Annesley I have the following:
1. Hugh Willoughby (b. c. 1393)
2. Edmund Willoughby
3. Isabel Annesley
4. Sir Edmund Willoughby
5. Alice de Somerville
6. Sir Hugh Annesley
7. Benedicta Babington
...
12. Sir Thomas Annesley (d. 1416)
13. Agnes de Clifton
...
24. Sir John Annesley (d. c. 1389)
25. Margaret de Pierrepont
...
48. Sir John Annesley (d. 1357)
49. N.N.
...
96. Sir John Annesley
97. Annora de Pierrepont
...
194. Sir Robert de Pierrepont (b. c. 1275?)
195. Sarah de Heriz
Is this correct? If so, that is six generations of Annesley's back to John
who married Annora de Pierrepont. At twenty years per generation, it would
place that John's birth circa 1273. Secondary sources place Sir Robert de
Pierrepont's birth in the range of 1275 to 1285. The secondary sources are
either wrong or there is something amiss in the Annesley pedigree. Any help
would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
Hal Bradley
-----Original Message-----
From: gen-medieval-boun...@rootsweb.com
[mailto:gen-medieval-boun...@rootsweb.com]On Behalf Of Rosie Bevan
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2007 5:16 PM
To: gen-medie...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
Thanks for those additional details, Michael. I wouldn't be surprised
if John I de Loudham had a previous marriage either. His son and heir
was born when he was in his mid forties and Alice de Kirketon was
considerably younger than he.
The descent from Maud/Alice de Loudham to the Pierreponts and
Annesleys is as follows. The Pierreponts are ancestral to many
Derbyshire and Notts. families, and the Annesley line decends to the
Viscounts Chaworths and Chaworths of Wiverton, as well as many others.
1. John II de Heriz d.1299
+Maud de Loudham d. aft 1299
2.John III de Loudham d.1329
3.Maud de Heriz
+ Richard de la Ryvere
4. Margaret de la Ryvere, the elder
+ Thomas Beler
4. Margaret de Ryvere, the younger
+ Roger Beler
2.Sarah de Heriz , brought manor at Rolleston in free marriage
+ Sir Robert de Pierrepont of Holme Pierrepont d.1334
3. Sir Henry Pierrepont d.v.p.
+ Margaret da William fitz William, had issue
3. Annora de Pierrepont d.1336
+ John de Annesley of Annesley
4. Sir John Annesley d. 1357, had issue
Annora de Pierrepont (named after her paternal grandmother Annora de
Manvers who brought the manor of Holme to the Pierreponts), carried
Maud de Loudham's dowry of property in Lowdham to the Annesley family
as is evident by a 1324 fine. Annora's stepmother was Cecily, daughter
of Sir John de Annesley, presumably Annora's father-in-law.
Cheers
Rosie
On Jul 7, 1:16 am, m...@btinternet.com wrote:
On 6 Jul., 09:49, Rosie Bevan <rbe...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
To summarise.
1.Herbert
2.Eustace fitz Herbert de Loudham fl. 1213, d.c 1241
3. Walter de Loudham fl c.1225, d.c 1272
3. Walter de Loudham d.c.1303
+ Joan Tregoz
4. John de Loudham b.c.1270-1318
+ Alice de Kirketon
5. John de
Loudham b.c.1314-c.1387
+ Isabel le Breton
6. John
de Loudham d.s.p.1390
+
Margaret de Burgh d.1449, married 2ndly John la Zouche of
Kirtlington, had issue
6.Isabel
de Loudham
+ Thomas Bekering
7. Alice Bekering
+
Sir Thomas Rempston
8. Elizabeth Rempston
+ John Cheyney
8. Isabel Rempston
+ Sir Brian Stapleton
8. Margaret Rempston
+ Richard Bingham
6.
Margaret de Loudham
+ Thomas Foljambe
6. Alice
de Loudham d.s.p.
+ Thomas
de la Ryvere
3.Alice/Maud de Loudham
+ John de Heriz
4. William de Loudham
5.Joan de Loudham
+Sir Geoffrey de Staunton
Wow - many thanks, Rosie.
A couple of slight additions:
(a) William de Loudham, the brother of Sir John (c1270-1314) was
probably the clergyman of that name presented by Sir John to the
church of Bilsthorpe (Register of William Greenfield, Archbishop of
York, 1306-1315, p 48, #1768), and possibly the incumbent
of Knaptoft,
Leics, of that name, mentioned in the Somerset Feet of Fines for 11
Edward II.
(b) Sir John III (d 1390) appears to have married twice, the first
time, at a young age, to a Katherine:
"John de Kirketon, knight, to settle the manor of Tumby on
himself and
Isabel his wife for their lives, remainder to John de
Loudham, knight,
for life, remainder to John, son of the said John de Loudham,
Katherine his wife and the heirs of their bodies, remainder to the
said John de Loudham and his heirs, retaining the manor of Ashby
Puerorum, Lincoln: 36 Edward III [1362-3] (PRO C143/342/16).
MA-R- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-requ...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe'
without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-
Rosie Bevan
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
Sir John Annesley (d.1410) was married to Isabel Ireland, daughter of
Robert de Ireland and Margaret Chandos, sister of Sir John Chandos.
See Ronny Bodine's post on her identity.
Cheers
Rosie
On Jul 10, 10:55 am, "a...@mindspring.com" <a...@mindspring.com>
wrote:
Robert de Ireland and Margaret Chandos, sister of Sir John Chandos.
See Ronny Bodine's post on her identity.
Cheers
Rosie
On Jul 10, 10:55 am, "a...@mindspring.com" <a...@mindspring.com>
wrote:
Hi Hal
The way I have it (at the moment) has an additional generation:
24. Sir John Annesley (dvp)
25.
...
48. Sir John Annesley (d. bef 12 Feb1410
49. Isabel Damory
...
96. Sir John Annesley (d. 25 jun 1357)
97.
192.John Annesley (d. 1316)
193. Annora de Pierrepont (d. 1336)
386. Robert de Pierrepont (d. 1334)
387. Sarah Heriz
...
Much of this comes from Rosie's excellent posts if I understood them
correctly.
Doug Smith
-
jonathan kirton
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
Michael and Rosie, et al.
I have been following your postings on this thread with great
interest, because, for a long time, I have been trying to work out
the early interconnections between several individuals surnamed "de
Kirketon", and the Loudhams of Notts. had some connections thereto.
I would like to review what I have understood from your several
exchanges, without repeating all your given sources, and then add
some of what I have found, giving my source references.
The Loudhams of Nottinghamshire.
Generation 1. Eustace de
Loudham [fitz Herbert]
born: circa
1175................................died: post 1241 / but by 1242.
Under sheriff of Notts. 1213; Sheriff of Yorks. 1224 - 26;
Sheriff of Notts 1233.
Generation 2. Walter[1] de
Loudham [fitz Eustace]
born: circa 1200......alive
in 1268, but had died by 16 Oct., 1272.
Generation 3. Walter[2] de
Loudham [fitz Walter]
born: circa
1235.................................died: before 19 june, 1305
Had a sister named
Alice or Maud, who died after 1299.
By 1267
Lord of Bilsthorpe, Notts..
Pipe Rolls, Notts. & Derby; New
Oblation: 1275 (i.e. prob. a new inheritance)
Married: Firstly: dau. Tregoz, a
sister of Nicholas, dau. of Geoffrey Tregoz.
[who became the mother of John[1] de Loudham]
Secondly: Isabel [by
1302-3].
Generation 4. Sir John[1] de
Loudham, Knight.
Arms: "Argent,
a bend azure, crusily or".
born between 1269 -
71..................died: 1318 [IPM Vol. VI, Ed II, pp106-8]
Aged 22 or 23 in 1292; he had a younger
brother William, evidently a priest,
who was still living in 1316.
On 19 June, 1305 Sir John was stated to
have been in possession of 1/4 of a
knight's fee at Bilsthorpe, Notts..
He married, circa 1310, probably as his
second wife, Alice de Kirketon, daughter
of Sir Robert [Bozon] de Kirketon, Kt.
of Kirketon-in-Hoyland [Holland], Lincs..
[Sir Robert was a son of Peter
[Bozon] de Kirketon, husband of Elizabeth
Woodthorpe, [dau. of Sir William de
Woodthorpe, Kt., of Aisthorpe, Lincs..]]
[Refs.: Notes and Queries, 6th.
series, Vol. 8 [1883], p.99 & "A History of
Aisthorpe and Thorp in the Fallows" by C.W. Foster (1927), Chap. 5,
pgs. 43-52]
Alice was the mother of their son, John[2] de
Loudham, born c. 1314, but when
the boy was only
aged 4, his father died in early 1318.
[Alice remarried on 6 Nov., 1318 to John
le Breton (Bret / Breton] and with him
had two more children; John le
Breton and Catherine le Breton.]
[Refs.: Thoroton, "Antiquities of
Notts.", Vol. 3, p.28-9; & "De Controversia in
Curia Militari inter Ricardum et Robertum
Grosvenor Milites" by Richard le Scrope &
another, (1832), page 354. Thoroton on p.30 actually mentions the
Kirketon arms being displayed in the
Loudham Parish Church following this
this marriage , Barry of six, gules and
ermine, but he got the bars in the wrong
order, with the ermine at the top
instead of the red. See Burke's General
Armoury: Kirketon of Lincolnshire, "Gules, three bars ermine"]
Generation 5. Sir John[2] de Loudham,
Knight.
born: circa 1314 [as above, aged 4 in
1318 when his father died] & aged 70 in
1386 [ref. le Scrope, ibid.];
died: 6 November, 1387, aged about 71.
He had one sister, Joan de Loudham. [Who
you have indicated to have been a prioress
between 1311-38 ??] However she is shown as having been the wife of
Sir Geoffrey de Staunton, Kt. of
Staunton, Notts., High Sheriff of Notts. & Derby,
temp. Edward III [reigned 1327-1377]. He
was heir to his grandfather, Sir William de
Staunton [Sir William died 1326]. Sir William's wife was Isabel de
Kirketon, sister of Sir Ralph de Kirketon, Kt.,
of Sibthorpe, Notts., both being the
children of Sir Alexander (Bozon) de
Kirketon, Kt., of Sibthorpe, Notts., and of
Kirketon-in-Hoyland, Lincs.; High
Sheriff of Yorkshire 1274-78 [Ref.. "Knights of
Edward I ", Charles Moor [1929]; CPR;
and "A Genealogical & Heraldric History of the
Commoners of GB" by John Burke, page 527, etc..]
Sir Geoffrey and Joan de Loudham had three sons:
William [Sir]; Thomas[Sir]
d.s.p.; and Ralph. Sir Geoffrey died in 1369.
Sir John[2] de Loudham married Isabel
le Breton [born circa 1324], daughter &
heiress of Sir Robert Breton, Kt., [died
circa 1350] of Walton, co. Derby, and had
four children: John[3] de Loudham;
Alice; Isabel & Margaret.
[Ref.: CPR 26 Edward III,
Part 1, page 233, 26 Feb., 1352]
Generation 6. Sir John[3] de Loudham,
Knight.
born: circa 1340
[est.]...............................died: s.p. 23 August, 1390.
Sisters:
Alice, d.s.p. before 1390.
Isabel, born circa 1360, co-heiress of Sir John[3].
Margaret, born circa 1362, co-heiress of Sir John[3].
Sir John[3] married: Firstly: Katherine, alive in 1362
[Ref. CPR, ibid.]
Secondly: Margaret de Burgh [born 1324,presum. a widow]
dau. & heir of Robert le Breton [died circa 1360]
of Walton, Brymynton, Whytyngton & Rodycke,
co. Derby. [Ref.: CIPM 16:411 1391]
[Presumably NOT the same Sir Robert
Breton of Walton, mentioned above.]
I will very much appreciate any comments on the foregoing, and to be
advised of any errors.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Kirton, Canada
I have been following your postings on this thread with great
interest, because, for a long time, I have been trying to work out
the early interconnections between several individuals surnamed "de
Kirketon", and the Loudhams of Notts. had some connections thereto.
I would like to review what I have understood from your several
exchanges, without repeating all your given sources, and then add
some of what I have found, giving my source references.
The Loudhams of Nottinghamshire.
Generation 1. Eustace de
Loudham [fitz Herbert]
born: circa
1175................................died: post 1241 / but by 1242.
Under sheriff of Notts. 1213; Sheriff of Yorks. 1224 - 26;
Sheriff of Notts 1233.
Generation 2. Walter[1] de
Loudham [fitz Eustace]
born: circa 1200......alive
in 1268, but had died by 16 Oct., 1272.
Generation 3. Walter[2] de
Loudham [fitz Walter]
born: circa
1235.................................died: before 19 june, 1305
Had a sister named
Alice or Maud, who died after 1299.
By 1267
Lord of Bilsthorpe, Notts..
Pipe Rolls, Notts. & Derby; New
Oblation: 1275 (i.e. prob. a new inheritance)
Married: Firstly: dau. Tregoz, a
sister of Nicholas, dau. of Geoffrey Tregoz.
[who became the mother of John[1] de Loudham]
Secondly: Isabel [by
1302-3].
Generation 4. Sir John[1] de
Loudham, Knight.
Arms: "Argent,
a bend azure, crusily or".
born between 1269 -
71..................died: 1318 [IPM Vol. VI, Ed II, pp106-8]
Aged 22 or 23 in 1292; he had a younger
brother William, evidently a priest,
who was still living in 1316.
On 19 June, 1305 Sir John was stated to
have been in possession of 1/4 of a
knight's fee at Bilsthorpe, Notts..
He married, circa 1310, probably as his
second wife, Alice de Kirketon, daughter
of Sir Robert [Bozon] de Kirketon, Kt.
of Kirketon-in-Hoyland [Holland], Lincs..
[Sir Robert was a son of Peter
[Bozon] de Kirketon, husband of Elizabeth
Woodthorpe, [dau. of Sir William de
Woodthorpe, Kt., of Aisthorpe, Lincs..]]
[Refs.: Notes and Queries, 6th.
series, Vol. 8 [1883], p.99 & "A History of
Aisthorpe and Thorp in the Fallows" by C.W. Foster (1927), Chap. 5,
pgs. 43-52]
Alice was the mother of their son, John[2] de
Loudham, born c. 1314, but when
the boy was only
aged 4, his father died in early 1318.
[Alice remarried on 6 Nov., 1318 to John
le Breton (Bret / Breton] and with him
had two more children; John le
Breton and Catherine le Breton.]
[Refs.: Thoroton, "Antiquities of
Notts.", Vol. 3, p.28-9; & "De Controversia in
Curia Militari inter Ricardum et Robertum
Grosvenor Milites" by Richard le Scrope &
another, (1832), page 354. Thoroton on p.30 actually mentions the
Kirketon arms being displayed in the
Loudham Parish Church following this
this marriage , Barry of six, gules and
ermine, but he got the bars in the wrong
order, with the ermine at the top
instead of the red. See Burke's General
Armoury: Kirketon of Lincolnshire, "Gules, three bars ermine"]
Generation 5. Sir John[2] de Loudham,
Knight.
born: circa 1314 [as above, aged 4 in
1318 when his father died] & aged 70 in
1386 [ref. le Scrope, ibid.];
died: 6 November, 1387, aged about 71.
He had one sister, Joan de Loudham. [Who
you have indicated to have been a prioress
between 1311-38 ??] However she is shown as having been the wife of
Sir Geoffrey de Staunton, Kt. of
Staunton, Notts., High Sheriff of Notts. & Derby,
temp. Edward III [reigned 1327-1377]. He
was heir to his grandfather, Sir William de
Staunton [Sir William died 1326]. Sir William's wife was Isabel de
Kirketon, sister of Sir Ralph de Kirketon, Kt.,
of Sibthorpe, Notts., both being the
children of Sir Alexander (Bozon) de
Kirketon, Kt., of Sibthorpe, Notts., and of
Kirketon-in-Hoyland, Lincs.; High
Sheriff of Yorkshire 1274-78 [Ref.. "Knights of
Edward I ", Charles Moor [1929]; CPR;
and "A Genealogical & Heraldric History of the
Commoners of GB" by John Burke, page 527, etc..]
Sir Geoffrey and Joan de Loudham had three sons:
William [Sir]; Thomas[Sir]
d.s.p.; and Ralph. Sir Geoffrey died in 1369.
Sir John[2] de Loudham married Isabel
le Breton [born circa 1324], daughter &
heiress of Sir Robert Breton, Kt., [died
circa 1350] of Walton, co. Derby, and had
four children: John[3] de Loudham;
Alice; Isabel & Margaret.
[Ref.: CPR 26 Edward III,
Part 1, page 233, 26 Feb., 1352]
Generation 6. Sir John[3] de Loudham,
Knight.
born: circa 1340
[est.]...............................died: s.p. 23 August, 1390.
Sisters:
Alice, d.s.p. before 1390.
Isabel, born circa 1360, co-heiress of Sir John[3].
Margaret, born circa 1362, co-heiress of Sir John[3].
Sir John[3] married: Firstly: Katherine, alive in 1362
[Ref. CPR, ibid.]
Secondly: Margaret de Burgh [born 1324,presum. a widow]
dau. & heir of Robert le Breton [died circa 1360]
of Walton, Brymynton, Whytyngton & Rodycke,
co. Derby. [Ref.: CIPM 16:411 1391]
[Presumably NOT the same Sir Robert
Breton of Walton, mentioned above.]
I will very much appreciate any comments on the foregoing, and to be
advised of any errors.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Kirton, Canada
-
Gjest
Re: The early lineage of the Loudhams of Notts
On 10 Jul., 12:11, jonathan kirton <jonathankir...@sympatico.ca>
wrote:
Hi Jonathan
That looks about right. A couple of slight observations - there is no
reason to believe the prioress Joan de Loudham was the same as the
wife of Sir William Staunton, they just shared the same name.
Also, Margaret Burgh, the wife of the last Sir John Loudham, was not
the daughter of Robert le Breton (that was her mother-in-law, Isabel)
and cannot have been born in 1324, given that she survived until
1449. Rather, she was the daughter of Sir John Burgh of Burrough
Green (per HoP). Isabel was born about 1324, according to her
father's IPM.
I greatly appreciated your Kirketon posts a while back; would you be
agreeable to a seperate thread summarising their stemma? I would be
happy to kick it off, and would welcome your input and corrections.
Kind regards, Michael
wrote:
Michael and Rosie, et al.
I have been following your postings on this thread with great
interest, because, for a long time, I have been trying to work out
the early interconnections between several individuals surnamed "de
Kirketon", and the Loudhams of Notts. had some connections thereto.
I would like to review what I have understood from your several
exchanges, without repeating all your given sources, and then add
some of what I have found, giving my source references.
I will very much appreciate any comments on the foregoing, and to be
advised of any errors.
Hi Jonathan
That looks about right. A couple of slight observations - there is no
reason to believe the prioress Joan de Loudham was the same as the
wife of Sir William Staunton, they just shared the same name.
Also, Margaret Burgh, the wife of the last Sir John Loudham, was not
the daughter of Robert le Breton (that was her mother-in-law, Isabel)
and cannot have been born in 1324, given that she survived until
1449. Rather, she was the daughter of Sir John Burgh of Burrough
Green (per HoP). Isabel was born about 1324, according to her
father's IPM.
I greatly appreciated your Kirketon posts a while back; would you be
agreeable to a seperate thread summarising their stemma? I would be
happy to kick it off, and would welcome your input and corrections.
Kind regards, Michael