Notes |
- RICHARD FITZROY- The descendants of Richard, the bastard son of King John, who took a prominent part in the great naval battle off the Kentish coast in August 1217, have been the subject of several serious errors in our county histories and other works of reference. Richard was the son of John, by a daughter of an Earl de Warenne, probably Hamelin, a natural brother of Henry II. On 13 May 1216, the King ordered the Sheriffs of Kent and Sussex to cause the young Richard to have a lawful aid for making himself a knight, [1] and as he was then engaged in warfare, it is probable that he attained his majority within a few years of that date. He had already married Rose, who is known to have been the daughter and heiress of Robert of Dover; for on 11 June 1214, William Briwere was ordered to deliver to Richard, the King's son, all the land which fell to Rose, his wife, hereditarily. [2] Through her grandmother, also called Rose, Richard's wife inherited the manors of Lesnes, in Kent, and Great Wendon, in Essex. She also inherited the castle and honour of Chilham, in Kent, from her father.
Richard was sometimes known as Richard de Warenne, sometimes as Richard of Chilham, sometimes as Richard of Dover, and sometimes as Richard Fitzroy. In the Cotton Collection there was formerly one of his charters, which seems to have been since either,lost or destroyed. Fortunately a facsimile of its seal, bearing the legend, "Sigillum Ricardi de Varenna," appears in Francis Sandford's "Genealogical History," from which we learn that he used as his arms two leopards. [3] The date of Richard's death has not been ascertained. He was a party to a fine dated 1 July 1245; [4] and on 18 November in the same year a Richard of Dover was pardoned twenty marks, in which he had been amerced before the justices in eyre for pleas of the forest at
Footnotes, p. 105:
[1] Rot. Litt. Claus., i, 268 b.
[2] Rot. Litt. Pat,, p. 118 b.
[3] At p. 57. Of this charter he writes as follows:- "Ricardus Alius regis Johannis (I suppose this Richard) so styled in his Confirmation of the lands of Hugh de Byre in Chappellangere to the Church of our Lady de Cleue, hath his seal of Green-Wax affixed thereunto in which are two Lyonx Pastani Onardant and circumscribed Sigillvm Ricardi De Varkn . . . ." (p. 86).
[4] Feet of Fines, Case 55, File 47, No. 806.
Northampton, [1] and on 24 June 1246, the King informed the Sheriff of Kent that he had taken the homage of Rose of Dover, for all the lands which Richard Fitzroy, formerly her husband, held of the King in chief of her inheritance, and ordered him to allow her to hold the same in peace. [2] It is, therefore, probable that Richard died in the first half of the year 1246.
Mathew Paris records the deaths of Richard, the son of Roger of Chilham and Richard of Dover, his son, among the events of the year 1245. [3] It is almost certain that Roger is the outcome of a clerical error, the contracted word Reg' representing Regis, having been read as Rog' and extended erroneously into Rogeri. In any case the statement of Mathew Paris is not to be trusted, for many other persons whom he mentions as having died in the year 1245, undoubtedly died in other years. [4]
On 14 July 1250, the King for a fine of 100 marks, granted Rose licence to many whom she would, [5] and shortly afterwards she married William of Wilton, one of the King's judges, who was slain on 14 April 1264, at the battle of Lewes. [6] Rose survived her second husband for a short while only. Pursuant to a writ now missing, Fulk Peyforer, the sub-escheator of Kent, was directed to ascertain how much land Richard of Dover and Rose, his wife, recently deceased, held of the King in chief. [7] The woiding of the extent shows that it was made on the Wednesday after the feast of St. Mathew the Apostle, and an endorsement that this day fell within the escheatorship of William of Wendling. William was twice escheator south of Trent, the first time from 2 June 1259 [8] till 15 July 1261 [9] the second time from 23 July 1264 [10] till 24 September 1265." But Fulk Peyforer is known to have been sub-escheator of Kent on 8 February 126f; [12] and another person is known to have held that office towards the close of the first escheatorship of William of Wendling. [13] It is, therefore,
Footnotes, p. 106:
[1] Close Roll, No. 59, 30 Henry III, m. 25.
[2] Ibidem, m. 8.
[3] Matthei Parisiensia Chronica Maiora, Rolls Series, iv, pp. 491, 492.
[4] Mr. J. H. Hound has already drawn attention to Mathew Paris's error in writing Rogeri. Genealogist, vol. xv, New Series, pp. 129-133.
[5] Patent Roll, No. 61, 34* Henry III, m. 3.
[6] On the Pipe Rolls of 42 Henrv III we have, Willelmus de Wilton qui duxit in uxorem Roesiam de Douor' que fuit uxor Ricardi de Chileham. Pipe Rolls, No. 102, Roll 13 d.
'Chancery Inquisition Post Mortem, Henry III, File 47, No. [7]; Calendar of Inquisitions, No. 924, p. 310.
[8] Patent Roll, No. 73, 43 Henry III. m. 7.
[9] His successor was appointed on this day. Patent Roll, No. 76, 46 Henry III, m. 7.
[10] Patent Roll, No. 81, 48 Henry III, m. 7.
[11] His successor was appointed on this day. Patent Roll, No. 83, 49 Henry III, m. 6.
[12] Chancery Inquisitions Post Mortem, Henry III, File 31, No. 8; Calendar of Inquisitions, p. 190, No. 593.
[13] One A. de Den was sub-escheator of Kent within a few days of 9 August 1260 and 24 February 126f respectively. Chancery Inquisitions Post Mortem, Henrv III, File 24, Nos. 2 and 15; Calendar of Inquisitions, p. 129, No. 467, and p. 136, No. 480.
highly probable that, St. Mathews Day falling on a Sunday in 1264 and on a Monday in 1265, the extent was made either on 24 September 1264 or 23 September 1265. In this case Rose must have died late in the summer of one or other of these years.
In Edward Hasted's "History of the County of Kent," it is stated that Rose of Dover married first Richard, the son of Roger of Chilham, afterwards called Richard of Dover, who died before 16 Henry III, and that she shortly afterwards married Richard Fitzroy, a natural son of King John. [1] These statements are inaccurate and seem to be based on the passage in the chronicle of Mathew Paris, which have been mentioned above. Some doubt also seems to exist about Rose's parentage. She was the daughter of Robert of Dover, and her mother was probably Isabel, the second daughter of William Briwere, the elder. On the Pipe Rolls of 24 Edward I, John Wake is descrilied as the son and heir of Baldwin Wake, the heir of Isabel of Dover, the second daughter and heiress of William Briwere. [2] On 21 July 1213, the King delivered to William Briwere the custody of the land and heirs of Baldwin Wake, together with the marriage of Isabel, his daughter, sometime the wife of the same Baldwin. [3] Again, on 17 December 1233, William Briwere, Bishop of Exeter, who is believed to have been nephew to William Briwere, the elder, had a grant of the custody of the land and of the son and heir of William d'Avranches, with liberty to marry him to one of the daughters of Richard of Chilham and Rose of Dover, his wife, the cousin of the Bishop. [4] These facts suggest that it is not unlikely that Isabel, the daughter of William Briwere, the elder, had for her first husband Baldwin Wake, and for her second husband Robert of Dover, Rose's father.
Richard Fitzroy left as his heir a son named Richard, of whom more presently, and two daughters, namely Isabel, who married Maurice of Berkeley and Lauretta, who married William Marmyon. The marriage of Maurice with Isabel has for long .been denied, and G.E.C. in his "Complete Peerage," states as an undoubted fact8 that Maurice married Isabel, the daughter of Maurice de Creon, the husband of one of Henry the Third's half-sisters. G. E. C. seems to rely on the opinion of John Smyth, of Nibley, who wrote his "Lives of the Berkeleys" about the year 1618." The opinion of Smyth, however, is not supported by the original authorities which he cites. My own investigation has failed to discover a single entry on any of our public documents, which
Footnotes, p. 107:
[1] Vol. iii, p. 127.
[2] Pipe Rolls, No. 141, Roll 8 d.
[3] Rot. Litt. Claue., i, 146.
[4] Excerptn e rotulis finium, i, p. 252.
[5] Isabel is mentioned in a Lincolnshire fine, dated 29 May 1237, Lincolnshire Records, Final Concords, i, p. 297.
[6] Vol. i, p. 327.
even suggests that Maurice married a daughter of the King's half-sister. On the other hand, the chronicler who has been named Robert of Gloucester, states that Maurice married a daughter of Richard, the bastard son of King John. The words of the chronicler are as follows: [1]
Sir Richard fiz le rei of wan we speke biuore
Gentil man was inou bei he were ahast ibore
Vor be erles dorter of wareine is gode moder was
it is fader be king Ion; it bi3ete him a porchas
Sire Morisse of Berkeleye weddedo subj'e bicas
Is dojhter it bijet on hire he knijt Sir Tomas
Internal evidence shows that the author of the chronicle was very well informed about events in Gloucester; and his words upon the Gloucestershire family of Berkeley would, if uncorroborated, be entitled to credence. Fortunately corroboration is not wanting. One of the manors of which Richard Fitzroy was seised in right of his wife was Great Wendon, in Essex. By a fine dated 18 November 1251, and made between Maurice of Berkeley and Isabel, his wife, as plaintiffs and William of Wilton and Rose, his wife, as impedients (William having, as we have seen, married Richard Fitzroy's widow), a carucate of land in Great Wendon was assured to Maurice and Isabel and their heirs.- The limitation to the heirs of Maurice and Isabel instead of to those of Maurice only, suggests very strongly that the land was granted as Isabel's marriage portion by her mother Rose. Moreover, on 12 July 1264 the King directed that his kinswoman Isabel, the wife of Maurice of Berkeley, should have seisin of the manor of Wendon which was of her inheritance for the support of herself and family. [3] That Isabel was niece to Henry III is proved by the fact that on 10 August 1264, out of compassion for the poverty of Isabel, the wife of Maurice of Berkeley, his nieee, the King assigned to her for the support of herself and her children the manors of Harietsham and Trottiscliffe. [4]
Probably genealogists have been induced to denv that Richard's daughter Isabel married Maurice of Berkeley because they were under the impression that she married first David, Earl of Athol (by whom she had issue a son and heir), and secondly John de Bailletil of Cavers (in whose lifetime she died). It is perfectly certain, however, as will be seen presently, that the Isabel who made these two marriages was not the daughter but the granddaughter of Richard and Rose.
Richard, the son and heir of Richard Fitzroy, was engaged with his father in the year 1243 in the King's service in Gascony; and little else is known of him. [6] He is stated by Mathew Paris to have died in 1245, but there is an entry on one of the rolls of
Footnotes, p. 108:
[1] The Metrical Chronicle of Robert of Gloucester (Rolls Series), ii, 716.
[2] Feet of Fines, Case 56, File 58, No. 1082.
[3] Close Roll, No. 81, 48 Henry III, m. 5d. At this date the lands of Maurice of Berkeley were in the King's hands.
[4] Ibidem, m. 4.
[5] Francisque Michel, Rolei (Taxcox*, i, pp. 244, 259.
letters close which suggests that he was alive as late as 27 November 1247. He married the Countess of Angus, and left issue an infant son, Richard, and a daughter Isabel. There can be no doubt about his marriage, though it has hitherto escaped the notice of genealogists. By letters close, dated 2 December 1247, the King directed that the Warden of Eleham Park, in the county of Kent, should cause the Countess of Angus, the wife of Richard of Dover, to have four bucks of the King's gift. [1] Moreover, on 22 November 1265, Richard of Dover, described as the King's kinsman, received letters of protection; and the next entry on the roll of letters patent states that Gilbert de Humfraville, his brother, received similar letters on the same day. [2] At this date Gilbert de Humfraville was Earl of Angus.
The inquisition held on the death of Rose, the date of which has already been discussed, shows that her heir was Richard, the son of Richard of Dover, who would attain the age of twenty-one years on 1 February then next to come. There can be no doubt whatever that this Richard was not Rose's son, but her grandson. An assize [3] of last presentation was brought by the King at the Northamptonshire eyre of Trinity 1261 against William Marmyon and Lauretta, his wife, to recover the presentation of the church of Lutton. The verdict of the recognitors shows that Richard, the son of Richard . Fitzroy, left as his heir a son Richard, who at the date of the assize was in the King's ward. It also shows that Lauretta, the wife of William Marmyun, was a daughter of Richard Fitzrov. About the time of the assize the King granted the custody of the infant Richard and his lands to his Queen, who presented her clerk, John of Wells, to the church of Lutton.[4]
Richard, the grandson of Richard Fitzrov, married Joan, the daughter of Simon of Cray, who afterwards married Gilbert Pecche.5 Richard died in 1265 or 1266, leaving no issue, his heir being his sister Isabel, who was then the wife of David, Earl of Athol. By letters close, dated 4 December 1266, the King ordered the Barons of the Exchequer to cause the Earl to be quit of the sum of £100 in which he was bound for his relief and that of his wife for the lands and tenements which they held of the King in chief.6 As already stated, the Countess has been wrongly described as the daughter instead of as the grand-daughter of Richard Fitzroy and Rose his wife. The mistake is again made clear by the record of a case heard at the Kent eyre of Easter 1271, when Isabel of Dover, Countess of Athol, was summoned to answer William Marmyon in a plea of covenant made 3 May 1239, between Richard de Warenne, the son of King John, and Rose his wife, the grand
Footnotes, p. 109:
[1] Close Roll, No. 60, 31 Henry III, m. 14.
[2] Patent Roll, No. 84, 50 Henry III, m. 42.
[3] Assize Rolls, No. 616, Roll 1. See also for the minority of Richard, the grandson, an assize of novel disseisin at the Kent eyro of 1271. Assize Rolls, No. 365, Roll 10 d.
* Bridges, History of Northamptonshire, vol. ii, p. 460.
'For the marriage to Gilbert seo Rotuli Hundredorum, i, 232
8 Close Roll, No. 84, 51 Henry III, m. 11.
mother of Isabel, whose heir she was, and Robert Marmyon, father of William Marmyon, whose heir Robert was, concerning the manor of Lesnes. [1]
David, Earl of Athol, died at Tunis in the seventh Crusade in the year 1269, and not long afterwards his widow married again. [2] At an inquest held in 3 Edward I the jurors of the hundred of Felborough, in Kent, stated that Isabel of Chilham (meaning the Countess of Athol) who held of the King in chief, had married Sir Alexander de Railleul, without the King's license. [3] She died in the spring of 1292 and was buried in Canterbury Cathedral. On 1 May of that year the King ordered the goods and chattels of Isabel, Countess of Athol, to be delivered to her husband Alexander de Bailleul. [4] Her heir was her son John, who is stated in the "Complete Peerage" to have died in 1284 and to have been succeeded in the earldom by a son also called John, who was executed for treason on 7 November 1306. These statements are not quite accurate. The Earl wof Athol, who was executed, was not the grandson, but the son of David and Isabel; and no John, Earl of Athol, died in 1284. [5] This is evident from the documents next cited. By a writ of Privy Seal, dated 2 August 1305, the King informed his Chancellor that John, Earl of Athol, son and heir of Isabel, sister of Richard of Dover, had done homage for the manor of Lesnes, which Joan, widow of Richard, held in dower." On 5 March 1310, the King granted to Bartholomew of Badlesmere and Margaret, his wife, the castle and manor of Chilham, which Alexander de Bailleul had held by the curtesy of the inheritance of Isabel, his wife, whose son and heir John, late Earl of Athol, had been hanged for treason. [7] Bartholomew of Badlesmere also committed treason, and on 28 November 1321 the King granted the castle and honour of Chilham to David of Strabolgy, Earl of Athol, the grandson of Isabel of Dover. [8]
G. J. TURNER.
Footnotes, p. 110:
[1] Assize Kolls, No. 365, Roll 39.
[2] Complete Peerage, by G.E.C., vol. i, p. 181.
[3] Rottdi Hundredorum, i. p. 211.
[4] Scottish Documents (Chancery), File 9, No. 15; Bain Documents, ii, p. 141.
[5] The succession of Earls of Athole is correctly given in Sir James Balfour Paul's Scots Peerage, ii, 426-427.
[6] Warrants for the Great Seal, Series i, File 54. No. 5397.
[7] Calendar of Patent Kolls, 3 Edward II, p. 214; Calendar of Close Rolls, 3 Edward II, p. 252.
* Calendar of Patent Rolls, 15 Edward II, p. 33. [3]
|