Edmund de Lacy marriage
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Alan Grey
Edmund de Lacy marriage
I see from secondary sources that Edmund de Lacy (1227/30-58), earl of
Lincoln, was married to Alasia de Saluzzo. Could someone please advise
as to the original record that identifies or confirms this marriage. I
do not have immediate access to CP, so cannot check what it cites, and
note that the FMG site [Medieval Lands] does not have a reference.
Thanks
Alan R Grey.
Lincoln, was married to Alasia de Saluzzo. Could someone please advise
as to the original record that identifies or confirms this marriage. I
do not have immediate access to CP, so cannot check what it cites, and
note that the FMG site [Medieval Lands] does not have a reference.
Thanks
Alan R Grey.
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
Dear Alan ~
Sir Edmund de Lacy's wife was Alice (or Alasia) de Saluzzo, daughter
of Manfred III, Marquis of Saluzzo, by Beatrice, daughter of Amadeus
IV, Count of Savoy. Alice was a near kinswoman of Queen Eleanor of
Provence, wife of King Henry III of England. Evidence of Edmund and
Alice's marriage is found in Matthew Paris (Rolls ser.), vol. iv, pg.
628; vol. v., pg. 514.
The arms of the Saluzzo family were : Argent, a chief azure
[Reference: di Crollalanza, Dizionario Storico-Blasnonico delle
Famiglie Nobili e Notabili Italiane, 2 (1886-1890): 472-473. For
examples of Alice de Saluzzo, widow of Edmund de Lacy, displaying the
Saluzzo arms on her seals, see Birch, Catalogue of Seals in the
British Museum 2 (1892): 390; 3 (1894): 169; Ellis Cat. of Seals in
the P.R.O. 2 (1981): 63.
Regarding the question as to whether or not Edmund de Lacy was ever
Earl of Lincoln, Complete Peerage, 7 (1929): 680 (sub Lincoln) states
he "does not appear to have been formally invested with the earldom,
presumably because his mother outlived him, but he had the 3rd penny
of the county pleas." Collectanea Top. & Gen., 6 (1840): 147-151, on
the other hand, has the following to say:
"It has been much disputed whether this Edmund was ever Earl of
Lincoln ... In 1255 I find him joined in commission with the King's
brothers Geffery de Lusignan and William de Valentia and the Earls of
Norfolk, Warren, and Albemarle, to conduct the King and Queen of
Scotland into the presence of the King; in which commission, dated at
Alnwick, 2 Sept. though ranked immediately after the Earl of
Albemarle, he is not styled Earl of Lincoln, but only Edmund de Lacy;
but in the patent of safe conduct to the King and Queen of Scotland,
which bears date only three days after, viz. 5 Sept., the title is
given him, and he is called Edmund de Lacy, Earl of Lincoln ... After
this, I think it cannot well be denied that he enjoyed the Earldom,
though certainly but for a short time, as he died in 1257 ..."). END
OFQUOTE.
Whitaker, History of Original Parish of Whalley, 1 (1872): 236-254
says the following:
"As he [Edmund] did not survive his mother, the heiress of the Earldom
[of Lincoln], he never actually succeeded to that dignity, though
there are some documents in which he is styled Earl of Lincoln by
courtesy." END OF QUOTE.
In footnote k in Vol. 7, pg. 680, Complete Peerage notes that Edmund
"is recorded as Earl of Lincoln among the witnesses to a confirmation
by the King at Chester 18 August 1257," citing Calendar of Patent
Rolls, 1247-1258, pg. 575.
Sir Edmund de Lacy and his wife, Alice, have no legtimate
descendants. However, they do have living descendants through their
son, Earl Henry's illegitimate son, Sir John de Lacy, Knt., of Lacyes
(in Grantchester), Cambridgeshire. For particulars of Sir John de
Lacy, see C.P.R. 1345-1348 (1903): 472; D.N.B. 11 (1909): 375 (biog.
of Henry de Lacy, Earl of Lincoln); Sayles, Select Cases in the Court
of King's Bench, 5 (Selden Soc. 76) (1958): 90-91; VCH Cambridge 5
(1973): 203-204; PRO Document, SC 8/64/3163 ((John de Lacy styled
"brother" in petition dated c. 1335 of Alice de Lacy, Countess of
Lancaster).
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Sir Edmund de Lacy's wife was Alice (or Alasia) de Saluzzo, daughter
of Manfred III, Marquis of Saluzzo, by Beatrice, daughter of Amadeus
IV, Count of Savoy. Alice was a near kinswoman of Queen Eleanor of
Provence, wife of King Henry III of England. Evidence of Edmund and
Alice's marriage is found in Matthew Paris (Rolls ser.), vol. iv, pg.
628; vol. v., pg. 514.
The arms of the Saluzzo family were : Argent, a chief azure
[Reference: di Crollalanza, Dizionario Storico-Blasnonico delle
Famiglie Nobili e Notabili Italiane, 2 (1886-1890): 472-473. For
examples of Alice de Saluzzo, widow of Edmund de Lacy, displaying the
Saluzzo arms on her seals, see Birch, Catalogue of Seals in the
British Museum 2 (1892): 390; 3 (1894): 169; Ellis Cat. of Seals in
the P.R.O. 2 (1981): 63.
Regarding the question as to whether or not Edmund de Lacy was ever
Earl of Lincoln, Complete Peerage, 7 (1929): 680 (sub Lincoln) states
he "does not appear to have been formally invested with the earldom,
presumably because his mother outlived him, but he had the 3rd penny
of the county pleas." Collectanea Top. & Gen., 6 (1840): 147-151, on
the other hand, has the following to say:
"It has been much disputed whether this Edmund was ever Earl of
Lincoln ... In 1255 I find him joined in commission with the King's
brothers Geffery de Lusignan and William de Valentia and the Earls of
Norfolk, Warren, and Albemarle, to conduct the King and Queen of
Scotland into the presence of the King; in which commission, dated at
Alnwick, 2 Sept. though ranked immediately after the Earl of
Albemarle, he is not styled Earl of Lincoln, but only Edmund de Lacy;
but in the patent of safe conduct to the King and Queen of Scotland,
which bears date only three days after, viz. 5 Sept., the title is
given him, and he is called Edmund de Lacy, Earl of Lincoln ... After
this, I think it cannot well be denied that he enjoyed the Earldom,
though certainly but for a short time, as he died in 1257 ..."). END
OFQUOTE.
Whitaker, History of Original Parish of Whalley, 1 (1872): 236-254
says the following:
"As he [Edmund] did not survive his mother, the heiress of the Earldom
[of Lincoln], he never actually succeeded to that dignity, though
there are some documents in which he is styled Earl of Lincoln by
courtesy." END OF QUOTE.
In footnote k in Vol. 7, pg. 680, Complete Peerage notes that Edmund
"is recorded as Earl of Lincoln among the witnesses to a confirmation
by the King at Chester 18 August 1257," citing Calendar of Patent
Rolls, 1247-1258, pg. 575.
Sir Edmund de Lacy and his wife, Alice, have no legtimate
descendants. However, they do have living descendants through their
son, Earl Henry's illegitimate son, Sir John de Lacy, Knt., of Lacyes
(in Grantchester), Cambridgeshire. For particulars of Sir John de
Lacy, see C.P.R. 1345-1348 (1903): 472; D.N.B. 11 (1909): 375 (biog.
of Henry de Lacy, Earl of Lincoln); Sayles, Select Cases in the Court
of King's Bench, 5 (Selden Soc. 76) (1958): 90-91; VCH Cambridge 5
(1973): 203-204; PRO Document, SC 8/64/3163 ((John de Lacy styled
"brother" in petition dated c. 1335 of Alice de Lacy, Countess of
Lancaster).
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
-
Leo van de Pas
Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
Dear Douglas,
You state as fact that Henry de Lacy, Earlof Lincoln, had an illegitimate
son.
The Dictionary for National Biography is less certain "Henry de Lacy endowed
a kinsman, possibly a bastard son, with lands at Grantchester."
However, your quote that Sir John de Lacy referred to Henry's legitimate
daughter Alice as his sister sounds pretty convincing. Are there more
details known about Sir John de Lacy?
I know of a John Lacy, who could be the son of Sir John de Lacy, who is an
ancestor of Gateway Ancestor William Farrar as well as Lady Diana Spencer.
With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval,soc.history.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2007 6:43 AM
Subject: Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
You state as fact that Henry de Lacy, Earlof Lincoln, had an illegitimate
son.
The Dictionary for National Biography is less certain "Henry de Lacy endowed
a kinsman, possibly a bastard son, with lands at Grantchester."
However, your quote that Sir John de Lacy referred to Henry's legitimate
daughter Alice as his sister sounds pretty convincing. Are there more
details known about Sir John de Lacy?
I know of a John Lacy, who could be the son of Sir John de Lacy, who is an
ancestor of Gateway Ancestor William Farrar as well as Lady Diana Spencer.
With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval,soc.history.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2007 6:43 AM
Subject: Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
Dear Alan ~
Sir Edmund de Lacy's wife was Alice (or Alasia) de Saluzzo, daughter
of Manfred III, Marquis of Saluzzo, by Beatrice, daughter of Amadeus
IV, Count of Savoy. Alice was a near kinswoman of Queen Eleanor of
Provence, wife of King Henry III of England. Evidence of Edmund and
Alice's marriage is found in Matthew Paris (Rolls ser.), vol. iv, pg.
628; vol. v., pg. 514.
The arms of the Saluzzo family were : Argent, a chief azure
[Reference: di Crollalanza, Dizionario Storico-Blasnonico delle
Famiglie Nobili e Notabili Italiane, 2 (1886-1890): 472-473. For
examples of Alice de Saluzzo, widow of Edmund de Lacy, displaying the
Saluzzo arms on her seals, see Birch, Catalogue of Seals in the
British Museum 2 (1892): 390; 3 (1894): 169; Ellis Cat. of Seals in
the P.R.O. 2 (1981): 63.
Regarding the question as to whether or not Edmund de Lacy was ever
Earl of Lincoln, Complete Peerage, 7 (1929): 680 (sub Lincoln) states
he "does not appear to have been formally invested with the earldom,
presumably because his mother outlived him, but he had the 3rd penny
of the county pleas." Collectanea Top. & Gen., 6 (1840): 147-151, on
the other hand, has the following to say:
"It has been much disputed whether this Edmund was ever Earl of
Lincoln ... In 1255 I find him joined in commission with the King's
brothers Geffery de Lusignan and William de Valentia and the Earls of
Norfolk, Warren, and Albemarle, to conduct the King and Queen of
Scotland into the presence of the King; in which commission, dated at
Alnwick, 2 Sept. though ranked immediately after the Earl of
Albemarle, he is not styled Earl of Lincoln, but only Edmund de Lacy;
but in the patent of safe conduct to the King and Queen of Scotland,
which bears date only three days after, viz. 5 Sept., the title is
given him, and he is called Edmund de Lacy, Earl of Lincoln ... After
this, I think it cannot well be denied that he enjoyed the Earldom,
though certainly but for a short time, as he died in 1257 ..."). END
OFQUOTE.
Whitaker, History of Original Parish of Whalley, 1 (1872): 236-254
says the following:
"As he [Edmund] did not survive his mother, the heiress of the Earldom
[of Lincoln], he never actually succeeded to that dignity, though
there are some documents in which he is styled Earl of Lincoln by
courtesy." END OF QUOTE.
In footnote k in Vol. 7, pg. 680, Complete Peerage notes that Edmund
"is recorded as Earl of Lincoln among the witnesses to a confirmation
by the King at Chester 18 August 1257," citing Calendar of Patent
Rolls, 1247-1258, pg. 575.
Sir Edmund de Lacy and his wife, Alice, have no legtimate
descendants. However, they do have living descendants through their
son, Earl Henry's illegitimate son, Sir John de Lacy, Knt., of Lacyes
(in Grantchester), Cambridgeshire. For particulars of Sir John de
Lacy, see C.P.R. 1345-1348 (1903): 472; D.N.B. 11 (1909): 375 (biog.
of Henry de Lacy, Earl of Lincoln); Sayles, Select Cases in the Court
of King's Bench, 5 (Selden Soc. 76) (1958): 90-91; VCH Cambridge 5
(1973): 203-204; PRO Document, SC 8/64/3163 ((John de Lacy styled
"brother" in petition dated c. 1335 of Alice de Lacy, Countess of
Lancaster).
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
Alan Grey
Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
Douglas Richardson wrote:
Thanks for the response, Douglas. I have been exploring the Notton and
Barton families of Lancashire, and found that the Notton family had a
relationship with one or more men named Edmund de Lacy.
In 1255 Gilbert son of William de Nocton [Notton] quitclaimed to Sir
Edmund de Lascy the homage and service of Richard de Trafford of
Choderton [CPR, 39 Hen. III, 1255, m.5d, p.440]. The witnesses included
John Eland (perhaps the brother of Gilbert's wife, who is said to be the
daughter of Hugh de Eland) and William de Salebyry, Gilbert's
brother-in-law (being married to his sister Avina). This grant is also
found in the records of the Duchy of Lancaster [TNA, DL 25/1221], where
the grantor is listed as Sir Gilbert, son of the late Sir William de
Nocthon. The only known Sir Edmund de Lacy at the time is the earl of
Lincoln (even if by courtesy) who died in 1258.
That being said, I found a curious (undated) document, in which Olive de
Beston, described as the widow of Edmund de Lascy, quitclaimed her right
in the land in South Kirkby, co. Yorks., which she had from William de
Notton, her father, in free marriage [TNA DL 25/2121]. This Edmund is
clearly not the earl, since he married someone else who survived him.
I suspect there are two main alternative explanations here.
(i) There may be a remarkable coincidence in names that associates an
Edmund de Lacy with a William de Notton. Perhaps DL 25/2121 (Olive's
quitclaim) is of a much later date than DL 25/1221 (Gilbert's quitclaim)
and refers to either the father or son named William de Notton who lived
temp. Edward III (one of whom was probably the justice of that name).
There also happens to be an Edmund de Lacy of Folkton, co. Yorks, who
lived temp. Edward III, so perhaps Olive's quitclaim associates these
two men.
(ii) If Olive was Gilbert's sister, it could explain his quitclaim to
Lacy, but if true then it implies that the Edmund de Lacy to whom he
granted the service of Richard de Trafford was not the (earl) Edmund who
died 1258, since her father would not have been alive to grant her any
land (he died before [earl] Edmund de Lacy was born). This has some
support by the fact that the grant, though significant, does not seem to
appear among Edmund's possessions in the inquest after his death [Lanc.
Inq., Extents etc., pp.213-219].
Any thoughts?
Alan R Grey
Sir Edmund de Lacy's wife was Alice (or Alasia) de Saluzzo, daughter
of Manfred III, Marquis of Saluzzo, by Beatrice, daughter of Amadeus
IV, Count of Savoy. Alice was a near kinswoman of Queen Eleanor of
Provence, wife of King Henry III of England. Evidence of Edmund and
Alice's marriage is found in Matthew Paris (Rolls ser.), vol. iv, pg.
628; vol. v., pg. 514.
The arms of the Saluzzo family were : Argent, a chief azure
[Reference: di Crollalanza, Dizionario Storico-Blasnonico delle
Famiglie Nobili e Notabili Italiane, 2 (1886-1890): 472-473. For
examples of Alice de Saluzzo, widow of Edmund de Lacy, displaying the
Saluzzo arms on her seals, see Birch, Catalogue of Seals in the
British Museum 2 (1892): 390; 3 (1894): 169; Ellis Cat. of Seals in
the P.R.O. 2 (1981): 63.
Thanks for the response, Douglas. I have been exploring the Notton and
Barton families of Lancashire, and found that the Notton family had a
relationship with one or more men named Edmund de Lacy.
In 1255 Gilbert son of William de Nocton [Notton] quitclaimed to Sir
Edmund de Lascy the homage and service of Richard de Trafford of
Choderton [CPR, 39 Hen. III, 1255, m.5d, p.440]. The witnesses included
John Eland (perhaps the brother of Gilbert's wife, who is said to be the
daughter of Hugh de Eland) and William de Salebyry, Gilbert's
brother-in-law (being married to his sister Avina). This grant is also
found in the records of the Duchy of Lancaster [TNA, DL 25/1221], where
the grantor is listed as Sir Gilbert, son of the late Sir William de
Nocthon. The only known Sir Edmund de Lacy at the time is the earl of
Lincoln (even if by courtesy) who died in 1258.
That being said, I found a curious (undated) document, in which Olive de
Beston, described as the widow of Edmund de Lascy, quitclaimed her right
in the land in South Kirkby, co. Yorks., which she had from William de
Notton, her father, in free marriage [TNA DL 25/2121]. This Edmund is
clearly not the earl, since he married someone else who survived him.
I suspect there are two main alternative explanations here.
(i) There may be a remarkable coincidence in names that associates an
Edmund de Lacy with a William de Notton. Perhaps DL 25/2121 (Olive's
quitclaim) is of a much later date than DL 25/1221 (Gilbert's quitclaim)
and refers to either the father or son named William de Notton who lived
temp. Edward III (one of whom was probably the justice of that name).
There also happens to be an Edmund de Lacy of Folkton, co. Yorks, who
lived temp. Edward III, so perhaps Olive's quitclaim associates these
two men.
(ii) If Olive was Gilbert's sister, it could explain his quitclaim to
Lacy, but if true then it implies that the Edmund de Lacy to whom he
granted the service of Richard de Trafford was not the (earl) Edmund who
died 1258, since her father would not have been alive to grant her any
land (he died before [earl] Edmund de Lacy was born). This has some
support by the fact that the grant, though significant, does not seem to
appear among Edmund's possessions in the inquest after his death [Lanc.
Inq., Extents etc., pp.213-219].
Any thoughts?
Alan R Grey
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
Dear Alan and Robert ~
As stated by Robert, Complete Peerage, 7 (1929): 680, footnote e shows
that the king in June 1263 promised Margaret, Countess of Lincoln,
that her executors should have free administration of her goods. The
editor of Complete Peerage disregarded this record as being an
indication of Margaret's actual death date, and rightly so. The
reason for this simple. The king occasionally promised to do
something in the future which had no regard to current events such as
Margaret's death. Countess Margaret was certainly living at the date
the king made his promise to her executors, as the king states that
the grant was made to her, not her executors. Had Margaret not been
living, the king would simply have ordered her executors to have
administration of her estate, not promised to do so. My guess is that
Margaret was in ill health in 1263, and, as she approached death, she
wanted to make sure that her intents regarding her estate were carried
out. Unfortunately this record doesn't tell us when Countess Margaret
died, only that she was in ill health in June 1263.
A similar promise was extracted from the king when Countess Margaret's
son, Sir Edmund de Lacy, died. According to Complete Peerage, 7
(1929): 681 (sub Lincoln), Edmund de Lacy died 2 June 1258. On
footnote j on the same page, the editor shows that on the 29th of May
preceeding, the King promised Edmund that his executors should have
free administration of his will. Thus the promise regarding Edmund's
executors took place before Edmund's death, not afterwards.
As for the second bit of information, we are informed that Margaret de
Lacy's grandson and heir, Henry de Lacy, was due two years of arrears
of annuity owed to him since his grandmother's death. Complete
Peerage implies the reckoning of the arrears as having taken place at
Easter 1268, but Alan shows that the recokoning actually took place a
few months earlier on 10 December 1267. The specific wording of the
1267 document is that the two years of the annuity "are in
arrear" [present tense] as of 10 December 1267, not as of Easter
1268. The date of Easter 1268 is important only because the king
promised to pay the arrears by that date. However, all things
considered, it is possible that the intention of the document was to
establish that the arrears would be two years behind as of Easter
1268, not 10 December 1267, regardless of the actual wording of the
document. If so, then Countess Margaret could have died as late as
Easter 1266.
That Countess Margaret was living about 3 March 1266, is suggested by
Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1258-1266, pg. 564, which indicates that
King Henry III made a grant on that date to John de Haveringes at the
instance of Margery Countess of Lincoln and others. Please note that
Countess Margaret is called Margery, not Margaret. The reason for
this is that the given names Margaret and Margery were completely
interchangeable in this time period in England. Likewise Countess
Margaret is not styled "late Countess of Lincoln" as would be the case
if she was already deceased.
As stated by Complete Peerage, Countess Margaret died shortly before
30 March 1266, when the king granted wardship of all the lands "late
of Margaret, sometime countess of Lincoln" to his wife, Queen Eleanor
{Reference: Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1258-1266, pg. 574]. That 30
March 1266 marks the approximate date of the Countess' death is
virtually certain, as the king, being perpetually short of money,
would have immediately attended to a valuable estate such as that of
the Countess of Lincoln.
Lastly, Complete Peerage cites as a source for Countess Margaret's
death date the following source, which I haven't yet seen:
Luard, ed., Annales Monastici, 2 (Rolls Series 36) (1869): 104 (Annals
of Winchester).
If anyone has access to this item, I'd appreciate it if they could
post particulars regarding it here on the newsgroup.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
As stated by Robert, Complete Peerage, 7 (1929): 680, footnote e shows
that the king in June 1263 promised Margaret, Countess of Lincoln,
that her executors should have free administration of her goods. The
editor of Complete Peerage disregarded this record as being an
indication of Margaret's actual death date, and rightly so. The
reason for this simple. The king occasionally promised to do
something in the future which had no regard to current events such as
Margaret's death. Countess Margaret was certainly living at the date
the king made his promise to her executors, as the king states that
the grant was made to her, not her executors. Had Margaret not been
living, the king would simply have ordered her executors to have
administration of her estate, not promised to do so. My guess is that
Margaret was in ill health in 1263, and, as she approached death, she
wanted to make sure that her intents regarding her estate were carried
out. Unfortunately this record doesn't tell us when Countess Margaret
died, only that she was in ill health in June 1263.
A similar promise was extracted from the king when Countess Margaret's
son, Sir Edmund de Lacy, died. According to Complete Peerage, 7
(1929): 681 (sub Lincoln), Edmund de Lacy died 2 June 1258. On
footnote j on the same page, the editor shows that on the 29th of May
preceeding, the King promised Edmund that his executors should have
free administration of his will. Thus the promise regarding Edmund's
executors took place before Edmund's death, not afterwards.
As for the second bit of information, we are informed that Margaret de
Lacy's grandson and heir, Henry de Lacy, was due two years of arrears
of annuity owed to him since his grandmother's death. Complete
Peerage implies the reckoning of the arrears as having taken place at
Easter 1268, but Alan shows that the recokoning actually took place a
few months earlier on 10 December 1267. The specific wording of the
1267 document is that the two years of the annuity "are in
arrear" [present tense] as of 10 December 1267, not as of Easter
1268. The date of Easter 1268 is important only because the king
promised to pay the arrears by that date. However, all things
considered, it is possible that the intention of the document was to
establish that the arrears would be two years behind as of Easter
1268, not 10 December 1267, regardless of the actual wording of the
document. If so, then Countess Margaret could have died as late as
Easter 1266.
That Countess Margaret was living about 3 March 1266, is suggested by
Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1258-1266, pg. 564, which indicates that
King Henry III made a grant on that date to John de Haveringes at the
instance of Margery Countess of Lincoln and others. Please note that
Countess Margaret is called Margery, not Margaret. The reason for
this is that the given names Margaret and Margery were completely
interchangeable in this time period in England. Likewise Countess
Margaret is not styled "late Countess of Lincoln" as would be the case
if she was already deceased.
As stated by Complete Peerage, Countess Margaret died shortly before
30 March 1266, when the king granted wardship of all the lands "late
of Margaret, sometime countess of Lincoln" to his wife, Queen Eleanor
{Reference: Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1258-1266, pg. 574]. That 30
March 1266 marks the approximate date of the Countess' death is
virtually certain, as the king, being perpetually short of money,
would have immediately attended to a valuable estate such as that of
the Countess of Lincoln.
Lastly, Complete Peerage cites as a source for Countess Margaret's
death date the following source, which I haven't yet seen:
Luard, ed., Annales Monastici, 2 (Rolls Series 36) (1869): 104 (Annals
of Winchester).
If anyone has access to this item, I'd appreciate it if they could
post particulars regarding it here on the newsgroup.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
-
Alan Grey
Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
Hi Douglas. I see that our posts crossed. Thanks for the additional
analysis.
Douglas Richardson wrote:
This is a good point, especially driven home by the fact that he made
the grant to his wife and thus own household (indicating the financial
need).
Yes, it would be good to see what it says as it may contain valuable
information.
Regards, Alan R Grey
analysis.
Douglas Richardson wrote:
[snip]
As stated by Complete Peerage, Countess Margaret died shortly before
30 March 1266, when the king granted wardship of all the lands "late
of Margaret, sometime countess of Lincoln" to his wife, Queen Eleanor
{Reference: Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1258-1266, pg. 574]. That 30
March 1266 marks the approximate date of the Countess' death is
virtually certain, as the king, being perpetually short of money,
would have immediately attended to a valuable estate such as that of
the Countess of Lincoln.
This is a good point, especially driven home by the fact that he made
the grant to his wife and thus own household (indicating the financial
need).
Lastly, Complete Peerage cites as a source for Countess Margaret's
death date the following source, which I haven't yet seen:
Luard, ed., Annales Monastici, 2 (Rolls Series 36) (1869): 104 (Annals
of Winchester).
If anyone has access to this item, I'd appreciate it if they could
post particulars regarding it here on the newsgroup.
Yes, it would be good to see what it says as it may contain valuable
information.
Regards, Alan R Grey
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
Dear Leo ~
Sir John de Lacy (occurs 1328-1348) is specifically styled "brother"
in a petition dated c. 1335 issued by Alice de Lacy, Countess of
Lancaster. This petition can be found online at the National Archives
catalogue [Reference: PRO Document, SC 8/64/3163]. Sir John de Lacy
is known to have been a member of the household of his half-sister,
Countess Alice. Likewise, VCH Cambridge 5 (1973): 203-204 shows that
Sir John de Lacy's seal, e.g., on St. John's Mun. 24/129, bore a lion
rampant, which is a coat of the Lacy earls.
Sir John de Lacy was the lineal ancestor of Frances Lacy (living
1572-1573), wife of John Beville, Gent., of Sawtry, Huntingdonshire.
Frances (Lacy) Beville was the paternal great-grandmother of the
colonial immigrant, Essex Beville (died 1682), of Henrico County,
Virginia.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Sir John de Lacy (occurs 1328-1348) is specifically styled "brother"
in a petition dated c. 1335 issued by Alice de Lacy, Countess of
Lancaster. This petition can be found online at the National Archives
catalogue [Reference: PRO Document, SC 8/64/3163]. Sir John de Lacy
is known to have been a member of the household of his half-sister,
Countess Alice. Likewise, VCH Cambridge 5 (1973): 203-204 shows that
Sir John de Lacy's seal, e.g., on St. John's Mun. 24/129, bore a lion
rampant, which is a coat of the Lacy earls.
Sir John de Lacy was the lineal ancestor of Frances Lacy (living
1572-1573), wife of John Beville, Gent., of Sawtry, Huntingdonshire.
Frances (Lacy) Beville was the paternal great-grandmother of the
colonial immigrant, Essex Beville (died 1682), of Henrico County,
Virginia.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
Dear Newsgroup ~
As a followup to my last post, I can add the following tidbit
concerning Margaret de Lacy, Countess of Lincoln, to the effect that
she was definitely living 30 May 1265, when letters were addressed to
her and to her fellow Countess of the Isle by the king, which letters
were evidently recorded in the "Household Roll." The letters are
discussed in passing a footnote in Report and Transactions of the
Devonshire Association for the Advancement of Science, Literature, and
Art, 2nd series 7 (1895) 229, which reference can be found at the
following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=jk0DAA ... ncoln+1266
There is additional material on Countess Margaret found in the book,
Kings, Barons and Justices: The Making and Enforcement of Legislation
in Thirteenth-Century England, by Paul Brand (2003): 178. This work
indicates that in Easter term 1262, an action of recaption was brought
against Margaret, Countess of Lincoln, Joce de Stepping [her bailiff],
and John de Lusby. Also, sometime in the period, 1263-1266, Master
Walter of Stainsby filed a writ of attachment against Joce de
Stepping, Steward of Margaret, Countess of Lincoln, which required
Joce to answer for having distrained Master Walter to perform suit at
the court of Lusby contrary to law.
The Brand book can be found at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=dt1yWv ... RI#PPP1,M1
Next, there are lengthy biographies of both Margaret de Lacy, Countess
of Lincoln, and her daughter, Maud de Lacy, Countess of Gloucester and
Hertford, found in the recent book, Portraits of Medieval Women:
Family, Marriage, and Politics in England, 1225-1350 (2003) by Linda
E. Mitchell. Ms. Mitchell gives full coverage to the discussion of
Margaret de Lacy's second marriage to Walter Marshal, Earl of
Pembroke, and the assignment of her Marshal dower. Interestingly, the
author completely rejects Countess Margaret's alleged third marriage
to Richard de Wiltshire. Here are her comments regarding this
marriage found on page 148:
"According to GEC [i.e., Complete Peerage] (and repeated without
question by subsequent scholars) Margaret married, for a third time,
one Richard de Wiltshire. This conclusion is based upon a single entry
in the Calendar of Charter Rolls, 1226-1257, pg. 393. Richard was
most assuredly a tenant or a knight in Margaret's household, but not
her husband. The king granted a fair in the manor of Chelbury,
Lincolnshire to Margaret and Richard jointly. Chelbury pertained to
the earldom of Lincoln, and thus Margaret was probably acting as
Richard's patron and warrantor in the royal gift. During the time of
this supposed marriage, Margaret litigated alone and dealt with the
Crown and Chancery as a single person. Thus, there is no evidence of
a marriage ever taking place between Margaret and Richard." END OF
QUOTE.
The Mitchell book can be found at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=fRgkT6 ... zjcKmcdjgk
I haven't studied the grant of the fair of Chelbury, Lincolnshire in
the Charter Rolls. However, if Ms. Mitchell is correct, the disproof
of Countess Margaret's marriage to Richard de Wiltshire would
represent an important new correction to Complete Peerage.
Next, there is an all new book which I found mentioned on the internet
entitled Women in Thirteenth-century Lincolnshire by Louise J.
Wilkinson. The work was published in 2007, by Brewer and Boydell. It
allegedly includes full length biographies of Margaret de Lacy (died
1266), Countess of Lincoln, and of her mother, Hawise de Quincy (died
1243), Countess of Lincoln.
The Brand, Mitchell, and Wilkinson books apparently all indicate that
Margaret, Countess of Lincoln, died in 1266.
For interest's sake, the following is a list of the enormous number of
17th Century New World immigrants that descend from Margaret (or
Margery) de Quincy (died 1266), wife successively of John de Lacy,
Knt., Earl of Lincoln, and Walter Marshal, Earl of Pembroke:
Robert Abell, Dannett Abney, Elizabeth Alsop, Samuel Argall, William
Asfordby, Barbara Aubrey, Charles Barham, Charles Barnes, Henry &
Thomas Batte, Anne Baynton, Marmaduke Beckwith, Dorothy Beresford,
Richard & William Bernard, Essex Beville, William Bladen, George &
Nehemiah Blakiston, Joseph Bolles, Thomas Booth, Elizabeth Bosvile,
Nathaniel Browne, Mary Bourchier, George, Giles & Robert Brent,
Obadiah Bruen, Stephen Bull, Nathaniel Burrough, Elizabeth Butler,
Christopher Calthorpe, Charles Calvert, Edward Carleton, Kenelm
Cheseldine, Grace Chetwode, Jeremy Clarke, James & Norton Claypoole,
William Clopton, St.Leger Codd, Henry Corbin, Elizabeth Coytemore,
James Cudworth, Francis Dade, Humphrey Davie, Frances, Jane &
Katherine Deighton, Anne Derehaugh, Edward Digges, Thomas Dudley,
Rowland Ellis, William Farrer, John Fenwick, Henry Filmer, John
Fisher, Henry Fleete, Edward Foliot, Thomas Gerard, William Goddard,
Muriel Gurdon, Katherine Hamby, Elizabeth & John Harleston, Elizabeth
Haynes, Warham Horsmanden, Anne Humphrey, Henry Isham, Edmund
Jennings, Edmund, Edward, Richard & Matthew Kempe, Mary Launce,
Hannah, Samuel & Sarah Levis, Thomas Ligon, Nathaniel Littleton,
Thomas Lloyd, Anne Lovelace, Henry, Jane & Nicholas Lowe, Gabriel,
Roger & Sarah Ludlow, Thomas Lunsford, Agnes Mackworth, Roger & Thomas
Mallory, Anne, Elizabeth & John Mansfield, Oliver Manwaring, Anne &
Katherine Marbury, Elizabeth Marshall, Anne Mauleverer, Richard More,
Joseph & Mary Need, John Nelson, Philip & Thomas Nelson, Ellen Newton,
Joshua & Rebecca Owen, Thomas Owsley, John Oxenbridge, Richard
Palgrave, Herbert Pelham, Robert Peyton, William & Elizabeth Pole,
Henry & William Randolph, Edward Raynsford, George Reade, William
Rodney, Thomas Rudyard, Katherine Saint Leger, Richard Saltonstall,
Anthony Savage, William Skepper, Diana & Grey Skipwith, Mary Johanna
Somerset, John Stockman, John Throckmorton, Samuel & William Torrey,
John & Lawrence Washington, Jemima Waldegrave, Olive Welby, John West,
Thomas Wingfield, Mary Wolseley, Hawte Wyatt, Amy Wyllys, George Yate.
Perhaps newsgroup members would enjoy posting their descents from
Margaret, Countess of Lincoln, down to their individual gateway
immigrant ancestor(s). I personally descend from Countess Margaret
through my immigrant ancestress, Elizabeth (Haynes) Cooke, who is
listed above.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
As a followup to my last post, I can add the following tidbit
concerning Margaret de Lacy, Countess of Lincoln, to the effect that
she was definitely living 30 May 1265, when letters were addressed to
her and to her fellow Countess of the Isle by the king, which letters
were evidently recorded in the "Household Roll." The letters are
discussed in passing a footnote in Report and Transactions of the
Devonshire Association for the Advancement of Science, Literature, and
Art, 2nd series 7 (1895) 229, which reference can be found at the
following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=jk0DAA ... ncoln+1266
There is additional material on Countess Margaret found in the book,
Kings, Barons and Justices: The Making and Enforcement of Legislation
in Thirteenth-Century England, by Paul Brand (2003): 178. This work
indicates that in Easter term 1262, an action of recaption was brought
against Margaret, Countess of Lincoln, Joce de Stepping [her bailiff],
and John de Lusby. Also, sometime in the period, 1263-1266, Master
Walter of Stainsby filed a writ of attachment against Joce de
Stepping, Steward of Margaret, Countess of Lincoln, which required
Joce to answer for having distrained Master Walter to perform suit at
the court of Lusby contrary to law.
The Brand book can be found at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=dt1yWv ... RI#PPP1,M1
Next, there are lengthy biographies of both Margaret de Lacy, Countess
of Lincoln, and her daughter, Maud de Lacy, Countess of Gloucester and
Hertford, found in the recent book, Portraits of Medieval Women:
Family, Marriage, and Politics in England, 1225-1350 (2003) by Linda
E. Mitchell. Ms. Mitchell gives full coverage to the discussion of
Margaret de Lacy's second marriage to Walter Marshal, Earl of
Pembroke, and the assignment of her Marshal dower. Interestingly, the
author completely rejects Countess Margaret's alleged third marriage
to Richard de Wiltshire. Here are her comments regarding this
marriage found on page 148:
"According to GEC [i.e., Complete Peerage] (and repeated without
question by subsequent scholars) Margaret married, for a third time,
one Richard de Wiltshire. This conclusion is based upon a single entry
in the Calendar of Charter Rolls, 1226-1257, pg. 393. Richard was
most assuredly a tenant or a knight in Margaret's household, but not
her husband. The king granted a fair in the manor of Chelbury,
Lincolnshire to Margaret and Richard jointly. Chelbury pertained to
the earldom of Lincoln, and thus Margaret was probably acting as
Richard's patron and warrantor in the royal gift. During the time of
this supposed marriage, Margaret litigated alone and dealt with the
Crown and Chancery as a single person. Thus, there is no evidence of
a marriage ever taking place between Margaret and Richard." END OF
QUOTE.
The Mitchell book can be found at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=fRgkT6 ... zjcKmcdjgk
I haven't studied the grant of the fair of Chelbury, Lincolnshire in
the Charter Rolls. However, if Ms. Mitchell is correct, the disproof
of Countess Margaret's marriage to Richard de Wiltshire would
represent an important new correction to Complete Peerage.
Next, there is an all new book which I found mentioned on the internet
entitled Women in Thirteenth-century Lincolnshire by Louise J.
Wilkinson. The work was published in 2007, by Brewer and Boydell. It
allegedly includes full length biographies of Margaret de Lacy (died
1266), Countess of Lincoln, and of her mother, Hawise de Quincy (died
1243), Countess of Lincoln.
The Brand, Mitchell, and Wilkinson books apparently all indicate that
Margaret, Countess of Lincoln, died in 1266.
For interest's sake, the following is a list of the enormous number of
17th Century New World immigrants that descend from Margaret (or
Margery) de Quincy (died 1266), wife successively of John de Lacy,
Knt., Earl of Lincoln, and Walter Marshal, Earl of Pembroke:
Robert Abell, Dannett Abney, Elizabeth Alsop, Samuel Argall, William
Asfordby, Barbara Aubrey, Charles Barham, Charles Barnes, Henry &
Thomas Batte, Anne Baynton, Marmaduke Beckwith, Dorothy Beresford,
Richard & William Bernard, Essex Beville, William Bladen, George &
Nehemiah Blakiston, Joseph Bolles, Thomas Booth, Elizabeth Bosvile,
Nathaniel Browne, Mary Bourchier, George, Giles & Robert Brent,
Obadiah Bruen, Stephen Bull, Nathaniel Burrough, Elizabeth Butler,
Christopher Calthorpe, Charles Calvert, Edward Carleton, Kenelm
Cheseldine, Grace Chetwode, Jeremy Clarke, James & Norton Claypoole,
William Clopton, St.Leger Codd, Henry Corbin, Elizabeth Coytemore,
James Cudworth, Francis Dade, Humphrey Davie, Frances, Jane &
Katherine Deighton, Anne Derehaugh, Edward Digges, Thomas Dudley,
Rowland Ellis, William Farrer, John Fenwick, Henry Filmer, John
Fisher, Henry Fleete, Edward Foliot, Thomas Gerard, William Goddard,
Muriel Gurdon, Katherine Hamby, Elizabeth & John Harleston, Elizabeth
Haynes, Warham Horsmanden, Anne Humphrey, Henry Isham, Edmund
Jennings, Edmund, Edward, Richard & Matthew Kempe, Mary Launce,
Hannah, Samuel & Sarah Levis, Thomas Ligon, Nathaniel Littleton,
Thomas Lloyd, Anne Lovelace, Henry, Jane & Nicholas Lowe, Gabriel,
Roger & Sarah Ludlow, Thomas Lunsford, Agnes Mackworth, Roger & Thomas
Mallory, Anne, Elizabeth & John Mansfield, Oliver Manwaring, Anne &
Katherine Marbury, Elizabeth Marshall, Anne Mauleverer, Richard More,
Joseph & Mary Need, John Nelson, Philip & Thomas Nelson, Ellen Newton,
Joshua & Rebecca Owen, Thomas Owsley, John Oxenbridge, Richard
Palgrave, Herbert Pelham, Robert Peyton, William & Elizabeth Pole,
Henry & William Randolph, Edward Raynsford, George Reade, William
Rodney, Thomas Rudyard, Katherine Saint Leger, Richard Saltonstall,
Anthony Savage, William Skepper, Diana & Grey Skipwith, Mary Johanna
Somerset, John Stockman, John Throckmorton, Samuel & William Torrey,
John & Lawrence Washington, Jemima Waldegrave, Olive Welby, John West,
Thomas Wingfield, Mary Wolseley, Hawte Wyatt, Amy Wyllys, George Yate.
Perhaps newsgroup members would enjoy posting their descents from
Margaret, Countess of Lincoln, down to their individual gateway
immigrant ancestor(s). I personally descend from Countess Margaret
through my immigrant ancestress, Elizabeth (Haynes) Cooke, who is
listed above.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
-
Alan Grey
Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
Douglas Richardson wrote:
We can push this out further, for she was most certainly alive after 12
August that year, for she could hardly object to a revocation of a grant
that had not happened until then (see my previous post citing CPR Vol.6,
p.437).
Alan
As a followup to my last post, I can add the following tidbit
concerning Margaret de Lacy, Countess of Lincoln, to the effect that
she was definitely living 30 May 1265, when letters were addressed to
her and to her fellow Countess of the Isle by the king, which letters
were evidently recorded in the "Household Roll."
We can push this out further, for she was most certainly alive after 12
August that year, for she could hardly object to a revocation of a grant
that had not happened until then (see my previous post citing CPR Vol.6,
p.437).
Alan
-
Leo van de Pas
Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval,soc.history.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 7:44 AM
Subject: Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
The Complete Peerage Volume VII page 680 gives She appears to have been
living early in March 1265/6; but died before 30 March 1266, at Hampstead,
and was buried in the church of the Hospitallers at Clerkenwell, near her
father. With your find we can tighten the date of her death to after 30 May
1265 and before 30 March 1266.
With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
when letters were addressed to
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval,soc.history.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 7:44 AM
Subject: Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
Dear Newsgroup ~
As a followup to my last post, I can add the following tidbit
concerning Margaret de Lacy, Countess of Lincoln, to the effect that
she was definitely living 30 May 1265,
The Complete Peerage Volume VII page 680 gives She appears to have been
living early in March 1265/6; but died before 30 March 1266, at Hampstead,
and was buried in the church of the Hospitallers at Clerkenwell, near her
father. With your find we can tighten the date of her death to after 30 May
1265 and before 30 March 1266.
With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
when letters were addressed to
her and to her fellow Countess of the Isle by the king, which letters
were evidently recorded in the "Household Roll." The letters are
discussed in passing a footnote in Report and Transactions of the
Devonshire Association for the Advancement of Science, Literature, and
Art, 2nd series 7 (1895) 229, which reference can be found at the
following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=jk0DAA ... ncoln+1266
There is additional material on Countess Margaret found in the book,
Kings, Barons and Justices: The Making and Enforcement of Legislation
in Thirteenth-Century England, by Paul Brand (2003): 178. This work
indicates that in Easter term 1262, an action of recaption was brought
against Margaret, Countess of Lincoln, Joce de Stepping [her bailiff],
and John de Lusby. Also, sometime in the period, 1263-1266, Master
Walter of Stainsby filed a writ of attachment against Joce de
Stepping, Steward of Margaret, Countess of Lincoln, which required
Joce to answer for having distrained Master Walter to perform suit at
the court of Lusby contrary to law.
The Brand book can be found at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=dt1yWv ... RI#PPP1,M1
Next, there are lengthy biographies of both Margaret de Lacy, Countess
of Lincoln, and her daughter, Maud de Lacy, Countess of Gloucester and
Hertford, found in the recent book, Portraits of Medieval Women:
Family, Marriage, and Politics in England, 1225-1350 (2003) by Linda
E. Mitchell. Ms. Mitchell gives full coverage to the discussion of
Margaret de Lacy's second marriage to Walter Marshal, Earl of
Pembroke, and the assignment of her Marshal dower. Interestingly, the
author completely rejects Countess Margaret's alleged third marriage
to Richard de Wiltshire. Here are her comments regarding this
marriage found on page 148:
"According to GEC [i.e., Complete Peerage] (and repeated without
question by subsequent scholars) Margaret married, for a third time,
one Richard de Wiltshire. This conclusion is based upon a single entry
in the Calendar of Charter Rolls, 1226-1257, pg. 393. Richard was
most assuredly a tenant or a knight in Margaret's household, but not
her husband. The king granted a fair in the manor of Chelbury,
Lincolnshire to Margaret and Richard jointly. Chelbury pertained to
the earldom of Lincoln, and thus Margaret was probably acting as
Richard's patron and warrantor in the royal gift. During the time of
this supposed marriage, Margaret litigated alone and dealt with the
Crown and Chancery as a single person. Thus, there is no evidence of
a marriage ever taking place between Margaret and Richard." END OF
QUOTE.
The Mitchell book can be found at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=fRgkT6 ... zjcKmcdjgk
I haven't studied the grant of the fair of Chelbury, Lincolnshire in
the Charter Rolls. However, if Ms. Mitchell is correct, the disproof
of Countess Margaret's marriage to Richard de Wiltshire would
represent an important new correction to Complete Peerage.
Next, there is an all new book which I found mentioned on the internet
entitled Women in Thirteenth-century Lincolnshire by Louise J.
Wilkinson. The work was published in 2007, by Brewer and Boydell. It
allegedly includes full length biographies of Margaret de Lacy (died
1266), Countess of Lincoln, and of her mother, Hawise de Quincy (died
1243), Countess of Lincoln.
The Brand, Mitchell, and Wilkinson books apparently all indicate that
Margaret, Countess of Lincoln, died in 1266.
For interest's sake, the following is a list of the enormous number of
17th Century New World immigrants that descend from Margaret (or
Margery) de Quincy (died 1266), wife successively of John de Lacy,
Knt., Earl of Lincoln, and Walter Marshal, Earl of Pembroke:
Robert Abell, Dannett Abney, Elizabeth Alsop, Samuel Argall, William
Asfordby, Barbara Aubrey, Charles Barham, Charles Barnes, Henry &
Thomas Batte, Anne Baynton, Marmaduke Beckwith, Dorothy Beresford,
Richard & William Bernard, Essex Beville, William Bladen, George &
Nehemiah Blakiston, Joseph Bolles, Thomas Booth, Elizabeth Bosvile,
Nathaniel Browne, Mary Bourchier, George, Giles & Robert Brent,
Obadiah Bruen, Stephen Bull, Nathaniel Burrough, Elizabeth Butler,
Christopher Calthorpe, Charles Calvert, Edward Carleton, Kenelm
Cheseldine, Grace Chetwode, Jeremy Clarke, James & Norton Claypoole,
William Clopton, St.Leger Codd, Henry Corbin, Elizabeth Coytemore,
James Cudworth, Francis Dade, Humphrey Davie, Frances, Jane &
Katherine Deighton, Anne Derehaugh, Edward Digges, Thomas Dudley,
Rowland Ellis, William Farrer, John Fenwick, Henry Filmer, John
Fisher, Henry Fleete, Edward Foliot, Thomas Gerard, William Goddard,
Muriel Gurdon, Katherine Hamby, Elizabeth & John Harleston, Elizabeth
Haynes, Warham Horsmanden, Anne Humphrey, Henry Isham, Edmund
Jennings, Edmund, Edward, Richard & Matthew Kempe, Mary Launce,
Hannah, Samuel & Sarah Levis, Thomas Ligon, Nathaniel Littleton,
Thomas Lloyd, Anne Lovelace, Henry, Jane & Nicholas Lowe, Gabriel,
Roger & Sarah Ludlow, Thomas Lunsford, Agnes Mackworth, Roger & Thomas
Mallory, Anne, Elizabeth & John Mansfield, Oliver Manwaring, Anne &
Katherine Marbury, Elizabeth Marshall, Anne Mauleverer, Richard More,
Joseph & Mary Need, John Nelson, Philip & Thomas Nelson, Ellen Newton,
Joshua & Rebecca Owen, Thomas Owsley, John Oxenbridge, Richard
Palgrave, Herbert Pelham, Robert Peyton, William & Elizabeth Pole,
Henry & William Randolph, Edward Raynsford, George Reade, William
Rodney, Thomas Rudyard, Katherine Saint Leger, Richard Saltonstall,
Anthony Savage, William Skepper, Diana & Grey Skipwith, Mary Johanna
Somerset, John Stockman, John Throckmorton, Samuel & William Torrey,
John & Lawrence Washington, Jemima Waldegrave, Olive Welby, John West,
Thomas Wingfield, Mary Wolseley, Hawte Wyatt, Amy Wyllys, George Yate.
Perhaps newsgroup members would enjoy posting their descents from
Margaret, Countess of Lincoln, down to their individual gateway
immigrant ancestor(s). I personally descend from Countess Margaret
through my immigrant ancestress, Elizabeth (Haynes) Cooke, who is
listed above.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
Yes, Alan, I complete agree. Thank you for sharing this information
with the newsgroup.
There is yet another discussion as to whether Sir Edmund de Lacy was
ever Earl of Lincoln found in a footnote in the source, Memoirs
illustrative of the History and Antiquities of the County and City of
Lincoln (1850): 273. This discussion can be found at the following
weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=mVAGAA ... 2-PA273,M1
The take of this author is that Edmund de Lacy was styled Earl of
Lincoln as a courtesy, it being "merely an acknowledgement of his
right in expectancy." The author cites two other examples of a
similar use of title by courtesy.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
On Jul 4, 4:02 pm, Alan Grey <a.g...@niwa.co.nz> wrote:
< Douglas Richardson wrote:
< > As a followup to my last post, I can add the following tidbit
< > concerning Margaret de Lacy, Countess of Lincoln, to the effect
that
< > she was definitely living 30 May 1265, when letters were addressed
to
< > her and to her fellow Countess of the Isle by the king, which
letters
< > were evidently recorded in the "Household Roll."
<
< We can push this out further, for she was most certainly alive after
12
< August that year, for she could hardly object to a revocation of a
grant
< that had not happened until then (see my previous post citing CPR
Vol.6,
< p.437).
<
< Alan
with the newsgroup.
There is yet another discussion as to whether Sir Edmund de Lacy was
ever Earl of Lincoln found in a footnote in the source, Memoirs
illustrative of the History and Antiquities of the County and City of
Lincoln (1850): 273. This discussion can be found at the following
weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=mVAGAA ... 2-PA273,M1
The take of this author is that Edmund de Lacy was styled Earl of
Lincoln as a courtesy, it being "merely an acknowledgement of his
right in expectancy." The author cites two other examples of a
similar use of title by courtesy.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
On Jul 4, 4:02 pm, Alan Grey <a.g...@niwa.co.nz> wrote:
< Douglas Richardson wrote:
< > As a followup to my last post, I can add the following tidbit
< > concerning Margaret de Lacy, Countess of Lincoln, to the effect
that
< > she was definitely living 30 May 1265, when letters were addressed
to
< > her and to her fellow Countess of the Isle by the king, which
letters
< > were evidently recorded in the "Household Roll."
<
< We can push this out further, for she was most certainly alive after
12
< August that year, for she could hardly object to a revocation of a
grant
< that had not happened until then (see my previous post citing CPR
Vol.6,
< p.437).
<
< Alan
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
Dear Newsgroup ~
Sir Henry de Lacy (died 1311), Earl of Lincoln, and his 1st wife,
Margaret Longespée, had four children as follows:
i. EDMUND DE LACY, born 23 Aug. 1271. He was contracted to marry
circa 1287 MAUD DE CHAWORTH, daughter and heiress of Patrick de
Chaworth, Knt., of Kidwelly, Carmarthenshire, Wales, Kempsford,
Gloucestershire, etc., by Isabel, daughter of William de Beauchamp,
Earl of Warwick. She was born 2 Feb. 1282 (aged 1 in 1283, aged 24 in
1306). This marriage was not consummated. EDMUND DE LACY died young
sometime before 30 Dec. 1291, when the marriage of Maud de Chaworth
was granted by the king to another party. He allegedly drowned in a
well in Denbigh Castle. Maud married before 2 March 1296/7 Henry de
Lancaster, Knt., afterwards Earl of Lancaster and Leicester.
References: Throsby, Thoroton's Hist. of Nottinghamshire 3 (1790): 132-
135. Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicanum 6(1) (1830): 315-317 (Norton
Priory) (Pedigree and history of the Founders). Whitaker, Hist. of
Original Parish of Whalley 1 (1872): 248-249. Christie, Annales
Cestrienses (Lancashire & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 14) (1887): 100-101
(Chronicle of St. Werburg sub 1271: "Natus est Eadmundus filius
Henrici de Lasey in vigilia Sancti Bartholomei [23 August]."). C.P. 7
(1929): 400 (sub Lancaster), 683, 686 footnote e (sub Lincoln).
Trans. Lancashire & Cheshire Antiq. Soc. 51 (1937): 19-43 (biog. of
Henry de Lacy). Harvey et al., Vis. of the North 3 (Surtees Soc. 144)
(1930): 63-64 (Lacy pedigree: "Edmundus [de Lacy] obijt ante
patrem.").
ii. JOHN DE LACY. He was killed by a fall from a tower in
Pontefract Castle during his father's lifetime. References: Throsby,
Thoroton's Hist. of Nottinghamshire 3 (1790): 132-135. Dugdale,
Monasticon Anglicanum 6(1) (1830): 315-317 (Norton Priory) (Pedigree
and history of the Founders). Whitaker, Hist. of Original Parish of
Whalley 1 (1872): 248-249. C.P. 7 (1929): 683, 686 footnote e (sub
Lincoln). Trans. Lancashire & Cheshire Antiq. Soc. 51 (1937): 19-43
(biog. of Henry de Lacy).
iii. ALICE DE LACY, suo jure Countess of Lincoln and Salisbury,
Lady of Clifford, Herefordshire, born 25 Dec. 1281, probably at
Denbigh. She married (1st) on or before 28 October 1294 THOMAS OF
LANCASTER, Knt., 2nd Earl of Lancaster, Leicester, and Derby, Steward
of England, King's Lieutenant and Chief Captain of all forces against
the Scots in the Marches, Chief Councillor to the King, and, in right
of his wife, Earl of Lincoln and Salisbury; married (2nd) before 10
Nov. 1324 EBLES LE STRANGE, Knt., Lord Strange (died 8 Sept. 1335
probably in Scotland); married (3rd) before 23 March 1335/6 HUGH DE
FRENE (or FREYNE), Knt., Lord Frene (died at Perth, Scotland Dec. 1336
or Jan.1336/7). Alice died 2 Oct. 1348, and was buried with her 2nd
husband in Barlings Abbey, Lincolnshire.
iv. MARGARET DE LACY, died in childhood. References: Ormerod,
History of the County Palatine & City of Chester 1 (1819): 515.
Whitaker, Hist. of Original Parish of Whalley 1 (1872): 248-249.
By an unknown mistress, Sir Henry de Lacy, Earl of Lincoln, also had
an illegitimate son, namely Sir John de Lacy, Knt. (living 1348), of
Lacyes (in Grantchester), Cambridgeshire, who has been discussed in
earlier posts.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Sir Henry de Lacy (died 1311), Earl of Lincoln, and his 1st wife,
Margaret Longespée, had four children as follows:
i. EDMUND DE LACY, born 23 Aug. 1271. He was contracted to marry
circa 1287 MAUD DE CHAWORTH, daughter and heiress of Patrick de
Chaworth, Knt., of Kidwelly, Carmarthenshire, Wales, Kempsford,
Gloucestershire, etc., by Isabel, daughter of William de Beauchamp,
Earl of Warwick. She was born 2 Feb. 1282 (aged 1 in 1283, aged 24 in
1306). This marriage was not consummated. EDMUND DE LACY died young
sometime before 30 Dec. 1291, when the marriage of Maud de Chaworth
was granted by the king to another party. He allegedly drowned in a
well in Denbigh Castle. Maud married before 2 March 1296/7 Henry de
Lancaster, Knt., afterwards Earl of Lancaster and Leicester.
References: Throsby, Thoroton's Hist. of Nottinghamshire 3 (1790): 132-
135. Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicanum 6(1) (1830): 315-317 (Norton
Priory) (Pedigree and history of the Founders). Whitaker, Hist. of
Original Parish of Whalley 1 (1872): 248-249. Christie, Annales
Cestrienses (Lancashire & Cheshire Rec. Soc. 14) (1887): 100-101
(Chronicle of St. Werburg sub 1271: "Natus est Eadmundus filius
Henrici de Lasey in vigilia Sancti Bartholomei [23 August]."). C.P. 7
(1929): 400 (sub Lancaster), 683, 686 footnote e (sub Lincoln).
Trans. Lancashire & Cheshire Antiq. Soc. 51 (1937): 19-43 (biog. of
Henry de Lacy). Harvey et al., Vis. of the North 3 (Surtees Soc. 144)
(1930): 63-64 (Lacy pedigree: "Edmundus [de Lacy] obijt ante
patrem.").
ii. JOHN DE LACY. He was killed by a fall from a tower in
Pontefract Castle during his father's lifetime. References: Throsby,
Thoroton's Hist. of Nottinghamshire 3 (1790): 132-135. Dugdale,
Monasticon Anglicanum 6(1) (1830): 315-317 (Norton Priory) (Pedigree
and history of the Founders). Whitaker, Hist. of Original Parish of
Whalley 1 (1872): 248-249. C.P. 7 (1929): 683, 686 footnote e (sub
Lincoln). Trans. Lancashire & Cheshire Antiq. Soc. 51 (1937): 19-43
(biog. of Henry de Lacy).
iii. ALICE DE LACY, suo jure Countess of Lincoln and Salisbury,
Lady of Clifford, Herefordshire, born 25 Dec. 1281, probably at
Denbigh. She married (1st) on or before 28 October 1294 THOMAS OF
LANCASTER, Knt., 2nd Earl of Lancaster, Leicester, and Derby, Steward
of England, King's Lieutenant and Chief Captain of all forces against
the Scots in the Marches, Chief Councillor to the King, and, in right
of his wife, Earl of Lincoln and Salisbury; married (2nd) before 10
Nov. 1324 EBLES LE STRANGE, Knt., Lord Strange (died 8 Sept. 1335
probably in Scotland); married (3rd) before 23 March 1335/6 HUGH DE
FRENE (or FREYNE), Knt., Lord Frene (died at Perth, Scotland Dec. 1336
or Jan.1336/7). Alice died 2 Oct. 1348, and was buried with her 2nd
husband in Barlings Abbey, Lincolnshire.
iv. MARGARET DE LACY, died in childhood. References: Ormerod,
History of the County Palatine & City of Chester 1 (1819): 515.
Whitaker, Hist. of Original Parish of Whalley 1 (1872): 248-249.
By an unknown mistress, Sir Henry de Lacy, Earl of Lincoln, also had
an illegitimate son, namely Sir John de Lacy, Knt. (living 1348), of
Lacyes (in Grantchester), Cambridgeshire, who has been discussed in
earlier posts.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
-
Ian Wallace
Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
On 4 Jul, 22:44, Douglas Richardson <royalances...@msn.com> wrote lots
of interesting stuff and:
As usual, we should add the eldest Batte (Batt) brother, William Batte
who after some years in Virginia went back to Yorkshire, three hundred
years later some of his descendants returned to live in America.
Ian.
of interesting stuff and:
For interest's sake, the following is a list of the enormous number of
17th Century New World immigrants that descend from Margaret (or
Margery) de Quincy (died 1266), wife successively of John de Lacy,
Knt., Earl of Lincoln, and Walter Marshal, Earl of Pembroke:
Robert Abell, ...Henry & Thomas Batte, ... Amy Wyllys, George Yate.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
As usual, we should add the eldest Batte (Batt) brother, William Batte
who after some years in Virginia went back to Yorkshire, three hundred
years later some of his descendants returned to live in America.
Ian.
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Edmund de Lacy marriage
Dear Newsgroup ~
Below is my descent from Margaret (or Margery) de Quincy, Countess of
Lincoln, through my immigrant ancestress, Elizabeth (Haynes) Cooke, of
Massachusetts. I'd enjoy seeing other posters' descents, when and if
they have the opportunity to share them.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
1. MARGARET (or MARGERY) DE QUINCY, died 1266, married JOHN DE LACY,
Knt., Earl of Lincoln, Constable of Chester.
2. MAUD DE LACY, married RICHARD DE CLARE, Knt., Earl of Gloucester
and Hertford.
3. GILBERT DE CLARE, Knt., Earl of Gloucester and Hertford, married
JOAN OF ENGLAND.
4. ELIZABETH DE CLARE, married ROGER DAMORY, Knt., Lord Damory [see
BURGH 6].
5. ELIZABETH DAMORY, married JOHN BARDOLF, Knt., 3rd Lord Bardolf.
6. WILLIAM BARDOLF, Knt., 4th Lord Bardolf, married AGNES POYNINGS (or
PONYNGES).
7. CECILY BARDOLF, married BRIAN STAPLETON, Knt., of Ingham, Norfolk..
8. BRIAN STAPLETON, Esq., of Ingham, Norfolk, married ISABEL _____.
9. ELIZABETH STAPLETON, married JOHN RICHERS, Esq., of Swannington,
Norfolk.
10. JOHN RICHERS, Esq., of Swannington, Norfolk, married ELIZABETH
BATCHCROFT.
11. HENRY RICHERS, Esq., of Swannington, Norfolk, married CECILY
TILLYS [see RICHERS 12].
12. FRANCES RICHERS, married EDMOND CUSHIN, Gent., of Swannington and
Hingham, Norfolk.
13. ELIZABETH CUSHIN, married WILLIAM THORNTON, Gent., of Lincoln's
Inn, and Downham (in Windham), Norfolk.
14. ROBERT THORNTON, Gent., of Hingham and Downham (in Windham),
Norfolk, married ANNE SMITH.
15. MARY THORNTON, married (as his 1st wife) GOVERNOR JOHN HAYNES,
Esq., of Old Holt (in Messing), Essex, Cambridge, Massachusetts, &
Hartford, Connecticut.
16. ELIZABETH HAYNES, married JOSEPH COOKE, Gent., of Pebmarsh, Essex,
and Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Below is my descent from Margaret (or Margery) de Quincy, Countess of
Lincoln, through my immigrant ancestress, Elizabeth (Haynes) Cooke, of
Massachusetts. I'd enjoy seeing other posters' descents, when and if
they have the opportunity to share them.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
1. MARGARET (or MARGERY) DE QUINCY, died 1266, married JOHN DE LACY,
Knt., Earl of Lincoln, Constable of Chester.
2. MAUD DE LACY, married RICHARD DE CLARE, Knt., Earl of Gloucester
and Hertford.
3. GILBERT DE CLARE, Knt., Earl of Gloucester and Hertford, married
JOAN OF ENGLAND.
4. ELIZABETH DE CLARE, married ROGER DAMORY, Knt., Lord Damory [see
BURGH 6].
5. ELIZABETH DAMORY, married JOHN BARDOLF, Knt., 3rd Lord Bardolf.
6. WILLIAM BARDOLF, Knt., 4th Lord Bardolf, married AGNES POYNINGS (or
PONYNGES).
7. CECILY BARDOLF, married BRIAN STAPLETON, Knt., of Ingham, Norfolk..
8. BRIAN STAPLETON, Esq., of Ingham, Norfolk, married ISABEL _____.
9. ELIZABETH STAPLETON, married JOHN RICHERS, Esq., of Swannington,
Norfolk.
10. JOHN RICHERS, Esq., of Swannington, Norfolk, married ELIZABETH
BATCHCROFT.
11. HENRY RICHERS, Esq., of Swannington, Norfolk, married CECILY
TILLYS [see RICHERS 12].
12. FRANCES RICHERS, married EDMOND CUSHIN, Gent., of Swannington and
Hingham, Norfolk.
13. ELIZABETH CUSHIN, married WILLIAM THORNTON, Gent., of Lincoln's
Inn, and Downham (in Windham), Norfolk.
14. ROBERT THORNTON, Gent., of Hingham and Downham (in Windham),
Norfolk, married ANNE SMITH.
15. MARY THORNTON, married (as his 1st wife) GOVERNOR JOHN HAYNES,
Esq., of Old Holt (in Messing), Essex, Cambridge, Massachusetts, &
Hartford, Connecticut.
16. ELIZABETH HAYNES, married JOSEPH COOKE, Gent., of Pebmarsh, Essex,
and Cambridge, Massachusetts.