Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2002-07 > 1026037735

From: "Chris Phillips" <>
Subject: Re: Another puzzle: Faucomberge and Felton
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 11:28:55 +0100
References: <00be01c22466$cfe746e0$d63686d9@oemcomputer> <003d01c22535$73421440$>

Rosie Bevan wrote:
> On the Fauconberge front, the IPM [CIPM v.XIX ; no.386] of Joan, widow of
> Thomas Faucomberge, knight, in 1408, reveals that she was holding the
> wardship and marriage of John son of Walter Fauconberge of Bilton,
> Yorkshire. This was for a quarter of a knight's fee in Nun Appleton near
> Cawood. This establishes that there was a John son and heir of Walter
> Fauconberge existing as named as heir of John Felton in 1403.
> This Fauconberge cadet line appears to have been established about a
> year earlier a inferred by the following references.

Many thanks for tracking down the _real_ John son of Walter Fauconberge!

It seems my suspicion that "Walter and Joan" in John de Felton's inquisition
post mortem might have been an error for "Thomas and Constance" really was
unfounded, and that Walter Fauconberge of Bilton married Joan, a full sister
of John de Felton (d. 1396).

To my mind, that leaves a big question mark over the identity of Constance,
the wife of Thomas Fauconberge. As discussed previously, chronologically it
doesn't seem possible for her to have been the daughter of John de Felton, a
younger son of William (d. pre 1328) as the Complete Peerage suggests. But
in the following generation, as far as we know, the only candidate who could
be her father is William de Felton (d. 1358). But this William's sons,
William and John, by two different marriages, both ultimately left sisters
as heirs, and Constance doesn't appear among them.

I suppose that if William (d. 1358) did have another marriage between his
two known ones (to the Isabel who appears in 1332?), Constance could be a
daughter of that marriage. Obviously this is getting extremely

Chris Phillips

This thread: