GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2003-10 > 1066408109


From: (Douglas Richardson)
Subject: Re: The identity of Maud, wife of Sir Ralph Hastings
Date: 17 Oct 2003 09:28:29 -0700
References: <93.33bf1daa.2cadaabd@aol.com> <accbf2a2.0310161143.5658296f@posting.google.com>


My comments are intersperced below. DR

(Rosie Bevan) wrote in message news:<>...

<SNIP>

> At this stage it might be useful to summarise the circumstantial
> evidence which points to Maud, wife of Sir Ralph Hastings, being a
> Grey of Rotherfield.
>
> 1. The dispensation needed because William Deincourt and Richard
> Hastings were related in the 2nd and 3rd degree of consanguinity,
> means that their common ancestry in the 2nd degree must have been via
> one of the four following families - Deincourt, Neville, Grey, or de
> la Plaunche. In the third degree it must have been from the following
> eight familes - Deincourt, Welle, Percy, Neville, Grey, the family of
> the unidentified Maud, Hillary, or de la Plaunche.

As a general rule, when people went to the trouble of obtaining a
dispensation, they married "up" to the best family they had in common.
Otherwise, there would be no motive involved for them to go to the
expense and trouble of getting a dispensation. These people didn't
marry for love. You have listed eight possible families, the Grey
family being one of them. I believe some of the other families
outranked the Grey family. If so, I recommend you look at the better
families first before considering the Grey family. You must also
consider the possibility that the degrees of affinity/consanguinity
stated in the dispensation are slightly off. On occasion, I find the
degrees were incorrectly stated.

> Placing Maud as daughter of John, 2nd lord Grey, as indicated by the
> chronology and evidence, gives the exact 2nd and 3rd degree
> consanguinous relationship.

Yes, it does, except that John, 2nd Lord Grey, already has a daughter
named Maud whose marriages are well documented. Is there some reason
why you are ignoring the known daughter? I recommend you examine the
evidence for the other Maud de Grey before you create a second one.
Have you done this? If the other Maud de Grey doesn't fit your
theory, then perhaps there's something wrong with your theory. You
need to disprove the other Maud de Grey's existence before you put
another Maud in her place.

> 2. The Sutton-in-Holderness property held by Ralph Hastings the
> younger at his death, was held previously by the Grey family and had
> passed out of their hands by 1376.

You state that Robert de Grey, Lord Grey, held the "reversion" in
1376. If so, this property was still very much among the Grey family
holdings. It had not passed out of the Grey family at all. Do you
understand the meaning of the word reversion?

> 3. The name Bartholomew was given to the fourth son of Sir Ralph
> Hastings. Bartholomew was the name of the third lord Grey of
> Rotherfield and putative brother of Maud.

The name Bartholomew is common enough in this time period. To
suggest that two families are related simply because they both used a
common given name is inappropriate.

> 4. In 1386 Robert, Lord Grey, Richard Grey and Ralph Hastings entered
> a recognisance of £1000 not to molest Robert Ashcombe who had been
> pursuing a debt of £40 against Maud, Lady Grey.

Recognizance bonds sometimes involved people who were related to each.
It seems that they most often involve relatives when when the parties
were required to offer security to spring someone from jail. The bond
you have cited may or may not be such an instance. All the same, this
is an interesting piece of evidence.

> All we need now is direct evidence, but knowing where to look makes
> the task easier.

You have more legwork to do before you can draw any conclusions. For
starters, I recommend you reexamine the list of the parties who
claimed kinship to Sir William Hastings. Louise Staley has claimed
she knows how all of these people are related to Sir William Hastings
but she has not yet posted her findings. Perhaps Louise would be kind
enough to post her evidence. Do any of the people on the list of
kinsman of Sir William Hastings descend from one of the eight families
you have listed above? If so, that might be a good clue for you to
follow.

Lastly, have you considered the possibility that Maud, wife of John de
Grey, 2nd Lord Grey of Rotherfield (died 1375), was a Hastings?
Maud's identity is presently unknown. Ralph Hastings' appearance in
the recognizance bond you have cited might be due to his own kinship
to the Grey family, rather than his wife's. Just a thought.

> Cheers
>
> Rosie

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

E-mail:

This thread: