GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2002-07 > 1026177415


From: "Rosie Bevan" <>
Subject: Re: Isabel, wife/wives of William de Felton (d.1358)
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 13:16:55 +1200
References: <003701c22535$40bb3420$6b4986d9@oemcomputer> <007901c22547$8413efc0$de00a8c0@mshome.net> <002a01c225a7$e523f3e0$683686d9@oemcomputer>


Dear Chris

Unfortunately VCH Northants doesn't cover Hinton Woodford and
my access to IPMs around this time is fairly patchy. I can only find two
references before and after this time.

In 1343 the IPM of Ralph Basset of Drayton states that Woodford and Hinton
were held by the heir of Thomas de Bray and John son of Thomas Boydyn.

In 1373 Hynton, Hynton by Brackley, and Hynton by Wodeford are all recorded
as being held of Humphrey de Bohun, Earl of Hereford and Essex, by Henry de
Hynton.

Presumably the transfer in property came about by the marriage of Margaret
Basset to John Bohun, Earl of Hereford and Essex, the former Humphrey's
elder brother. This does not seem particularly relevant to the Feltons in
any way.

However, I note that in the 1403 IPM of John son and heir of John de Felton
knight, mention is made of Richard Mersk and Peter Mersk, parson of Kildale
who acted as feoffees of the manor of Hinton by Woodford for John de
Felton, the father.

There is frequent mention of the Mersk family of Marsk in the Guisborough
cartularies. Mersk, or Marsk-by-the-Sea as it is now known, is three miles
north of Skelton (the Brus/Fauconberge barony caput) on the coast. The manor
of Marsk and eight carucates were held in chief by Henry de Percy, of which
the Fauconbergs held in demesne by knight service 2 carucates (the Feltons
also held Edlingham of Henry Percy). The fact that Peter Mersk was parson of
Kildale may be relevant for there appears to have been a Felton family
situated in Kildale, Yorkshire. In 1442 there was a John Felton of Kildale
mentioned who was awarded the wardship of the Percy of Kildale estates on
the death of John Percy in 1442. The son and heir, John Percy was a minor
aged 10. The Percy estates were held of the heirs of Brus via the Thweng,
Meinell, Darcy line. [VCH North Riding of Yorkshire v.2 p. 251; The
Guisborough Cartulary v.1p.229n]. .

There is further evidence of the Felton/Fauconberge/Percy connection in the
1401 IPM of Isabel widow of Walter Fauconberge.

"YORK. Inquisition. Thirsk. 27 June 1401
She held in dower a third part of the castle and manor of Skelton in
Cleveland and a third part of the manor of Marske, parcel of the manor of
Skelton with reversion to Henry Percy, earl of Northumberland, for the life
of Thomas Fauconberge, knight who is still living, by a grant of Thomas,
made with licence of Edward III [CPR 1370-4 p.295], by which he gave two
parts of the manor and castle of Skelton and of the manor of Marske, with
reversion of the remaining parts after the death of Isabel, to the earl and
John de Felton, knight. Isabel attorned for the two parts. Afterwards the
earl and John de Felton, knight conveyed them to Thomas de Tweng, clerk,
Roger Lascels, knight, and Robert Lyon, vicar of Marske in Cleveland, for
the life of Thomas Fauconberge by royal licence. Thomas Tweng and Roger
Lascels died. The two parts and the reversion of the third therefore
remained with Robert Lyon. He conveyed them by his charter to the earl,
William Latymer, Nicholas de Carreu, Michael de Ravendale, clerk, John
Lasyngby of Rounton and John Capon for the said term, again with licence of
Edward III [CPR 1374-7, p.177]. All are dead except the earl, to whom they
should remain for the said term. They are held in chief of the crown by
knight service. The third part is worth 10 marks yearly."

CP V : 276 gives the account that Thomas Faucomberge spent 13 years or so
incarcerated in Gloucester castle for siding with the king of France, upon
which Constance sent a petition to the king requesting that he be released
into the custody of his friends John de Felton and William de Hilton owing
to the privations he was suffering. He was released into the custody of
Roger Fauconberge, his brother, and Thomas his cousin, but later transferred
to the earl of Northumberland, William de Hilton and Ralph d'Eure.

Constance' will of 1402 does not give any direct statement as to family
affiliation. Both Sir John Felton and Henry Percy took leading roles in the
affairs of Constance and her husband, and it may be significant that Henry
Percy earl of Northumberland was overseer of her will, though this may be
explained by the fact that both the Felton and Fauconberge's held land of
him and they shared common interests in northern and national politics.

Cheers

Rosie

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Phillips" <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: Isabel, wife/wives of William de Felton (d.1358)


> Rosie Bevan wrote:
> > You seem very adept in finding more questions than answers with this
> family!
>
> I think the Feltons certainly qualify as "one of those families"!
>
> > The papal reservation confirming the marriage of Isabella of Fife and
> > William de Felton is an excellent find and shows that they did indeed
have
> > issue as Duncan is undoubtedly named for her father, and is a younger
son.
>
> Actually I can't claim credit for finding that, as it's mentioned by both
> C.H. Hunter Blair in "Archaeologia Aeliana" and in the History of
> Northumberland.
>
> > The only problem with the Isabel of 1331/2 being a Grey is that her
> > theoretical sister Isabel was married toWilliam, Lord Heron and still
> alive
> > in 1362. Assuming there weren't two siblings with the same name, it
could
> > mean William Felton was married 3 times.
>
> That's a good point. It does seem unlikely there were two Isabels.
>
> > On the other hand Mary de Monthermer was born in 1298, and perhaps had
> been
> > cohabiting with her husband before 1320 in which case Isabel may have
been
> a
> > few years older than we assume.
>
> I should also like to understand how Isabel came to be under the
> guardianship of Sir William de Felton, as the Scalacronica claims. It
seems
> unlikely in any case that she would have been with her parents in Perth in
> October 1332 if she was married by that time. And though the Scots Peerage
> says she was captured at Perth by Edward Balliol (who had English support,
> which might explain why Isabel would be taken to England), in fact that's
> not true - Duncan and family were captured by the Scottish forces opposed
to
> Edward Balliol (whom Duncan had been supporting for several months).
>
> It does seem to me that John, as well as Duncan, must have been a son of
> Isabel of Fife. This hinges on whether the Isabel, wife of William de
> Felton, who appears in the fine of 1344 was Isabel of Fife (because the
> parties to that fine are described as John's parents in his IPM). On the
one
> hand there is the petition in June 1351 for a benefice for Duncan, who is
> clearly a son of Isabel of Fife. Unless Duncan was younger than seven at
> this time, the William and Isabel who appear in 1344 must be his parents
(we
> know that Isabel of Fife survived William de Felton).
>
> As well as that, there's the statement of Scalacronica that Isabel's
> marriage was to have been given to Robert the Steward of Scotland, but
> instead married William de Felton. I assume that places the marriage to
> Felton before about 1337, when the eldest son of Robert the Steward (later
> Robert II of Scotland) was born.
>
> Perhaps this part of the problem can definitely be settled by looking into
> the history of the manor of Hinton, Northamptonshire (settled in 1344 on
> William and Isabel and the heirs of their bodies) in the period of 30
years
> or so by which Isabel of Fife survived William. If we are lucky there may
be
> a reference to the manor being held by Isabel...
>
> Chris Phillips
>
>
>
>


This thread: