GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2004-11 > 1099941571


From: (Douglas Richardson)
Subject: Re: C.P. Addition: Joan, mother of Maud de la Mare, wife of Peter de Montfort
Date: 8 Nov 2004 11:19:31 -0800
References: <12c.4fd3a1d8.2eb947b4@aol.com> <2619efc9.0411060927.535d99ce@posting.google.com>


Dear Newsgroup ~

Upon review of a variety of records, I've determined that Maud de la
Mare, wife of Sir Peter de Montfort, was the daughter of Sir Henry de
la Mare (died 1257), of Ashtead, Surrey, a prominent royal justice, by
his 2nd wife, Joan, daughter of Sir John de Neville of Essex.
Conclusive proof of Maud's parentage is found in Calendar of Close
Rolls, 1264-1265 (1937), pg. 55, which reads as follows:

"Pro Matilli filia Henrici de la Mare. - Rex Willelmo de Wenling',
escaetori suo citra Trentam, salutem. Monstravit nobis Matildis filia
Henrici de la Mare quod, cum dudum contulissemus eidem Henrico
custodiam terrarum Willelmi Ortye defuncti qui de nobis tenuit in
capite habendam sibi et assignatis suis cum feodis militum, wardis et
aliis ad dictam custodiam pertinentibus, et idem Henricus dudum ante
mortem suam custiodiam illam assignasset eidem Matildi habendam usque
ad legitimam etatem heredem ejusdem Willelmi ..."

Briefly, the above text states that the king had formerly granted the
lands of William de Lorty deceased to Henry de la Mare, which Henry
during his life had assigned to his daughter, Maud, to have until the
lawful age of the heir of the said William de Lorty. Since no husband
is mentioned for Maud in this record, I assume she was unmarried at
the date this document was recorded. Typically, a husband would be
named if one existed. We know from other records that Maud was
definitely a minor in 1260. If we assume that Maud was still an
unmarried minor in 1265, this might suggest that she was born in or
about 1252. Maud and her husband, Peter de Montfort, had their first
known child in or about 1271, so a marriage date of between 1265 and
1271 for Maud and Peter would surely be acceptable.

Although there may be another grant involved, it appears that Henry de
la Mare obtained the lands of William de Lorty deceased in 1256 on the
payment of a fee of 100 marks a year at the Exchequer. The grant does
not mention William de Lorty's lands, rather the wardship "falling in
land to that yearly value" late of Sabina de Lorty. That Henry de la
Mare, the royal justice, is the person who obtained the Lorty
properties is indicated by the fact that Henry was then stated to be
in the king's "service," and then when he was in Gascony, he "gave
commandment to the queen and R[ichard] earl of Cornwall, guardians of
the realm." Elsewhere, the king states that he is about to send Henry
on a message to the court of Rome [Reference: Calendar of Patent
Rolls, 1247-1258 (1908), pp. 463, 478]. The records show that during
his career, Henry de la Mare the justice made several trips abroad for
the king.

That Henry de la Mare was married twice is indicated by the fact that
on his death, he was survived by a son and heir, Henry, who was of
full age ["plene etatis"] in 1257 [Reference: Calendar of Close
Rolls, 1256-1259 (1932): 159]. Curiously, the son is not mentioned in
any published accounts of this family that I can find. He evidently
did not survive long, as VCH Surrey shows that before 1260, half the
manor of Ashtead, Surrey (the family's chief estate) was held by Joan
de la Mare (widow of the justice) and her 2nd husband, Walter de la
Hyde, due to the minority of Joan's daughter, Maud de la Mare
[Reference: VCH Surrey, 3 (1911): 248]. This suggests that Maud was
her brother's heir before 1260. That Maud was half-sibling to her
brother, Henry, is suggested by the wide gap in their ages. Also, it
appears from other records that Maud's mother, Joan de Neville, had at
least one child by her 2nd marriage to Walter de la Hyde, namely
Hawise (wife of Robert le Veel). That Joan de Neville was the widow
of Henry de la Mare the father, not the son, is indicated by the fact
that Joan's daughter, Maud, was a child of Henry de la Mare, the royal
justice, not his son, as I have shown above. That Maud was the only
surviving child of Henry de la Mare is indicated by the fact that she
was sole heiress to the de la Mare family estates in Surrey and
Berkshire [see VCH Surrey, 3 (1911): 248; VCH Berkshire, 3 (1923):
253], whereas her half-sister, Hawise le Veel, was the sole heiress to
the de la Hyde properties in Sussex [see VCH Sussex]. Maud and her
half-sister, Hawise, were joint heirs to Norton Fitzwarren, Somerset,
as this property had been conveyed directly to their mother, Joan, not
to either of Joan's husbands.

That Henry de la Mare was considerably older than his surviving widow,
Joan de Neville, is indicated by several factors. First, I estimate
that Henry de la Mare was born no later than 1208, being the son and
heir of Sir William de la Mare, of Ashstead, Surrey, by his wife,
Basile, which William and Basile were married in or before 1204. Due
to the fact that there are several Henry de la Mare's in this time
period, it is difficult to know exactly when Henry de la Mare first
appears in the records, but we know that he was made a royal justice
in 1248, at which date I think we can safely assume Henry was at least
40 years of age [Reference: Edward Foss, Judges of England, 2 (1848):
397]. Henry de la Mare was surely born not much later than 1208, as
his first cousin, Pain de la Mare (son of his uncle, Henry, and Pernel
de Craon), was allegedly born about 1205 [Reference: C.A.F. Meekings,
ed., The 1235 Surrey Eyre (Surrey Rec. Soc. 31) (1979): 218-220].
That Joan de Neville was considerably younger than Henry de la Mare is
suggested by the chronology of her parents, John de Neville and his
wife, Hawise de Courtenay, and that of their other children. We don't
know exactly when Joan's father, John de Neville, was born, but his
parents were married before 1200 and he was clearly an adult by 1234.
Joan's eldest brother, Hugh de Neville, was born about 1235, being of
age in 1256. We know that Joan's mother, Hawise, married (2nd) Sir
John de Gatesden in the period, 1247/53, and produced one child by
that marriage, Margaret, born about 1253 [Reference: C.A.F. Meekings,
ed., The 1235 Surrey Eyre (Surrey Rec. Soc. 31) (1979): 196-199]. As
such, it would be safe to assume that Joan's mother, Hawise de
Courtenay, was born about 1210/13.

It is uncertain when the marriage of Henry de la Mare and Joan de
Neville took place. Henry de la Mare clearly knew the Neville family
as early as the 1240's. I find that in 1246, the year of Joan's
father's death, the king ordered Henry de la Mare to release the
castle of Stokecursy, Somerset to the king, Henry then being "John de
Neville's constable." This was immediately before Henry de la Mare
was made a royal justice. Henry and Joan were presumably married
before 10 July 1256, when the king made a gift of three deer ("iij
damos") to the "wife of Henry de la Mare." I find two subsequent
records dated 1256, both of which involve Henry de la Mare and Joan de
Neville's brother, Hugh de Neville. In one of them, Henry de la Mare
served as a pledge for Hugh de Neville, when the king granted Hugh his
late father's lands [Reference: Calendar of Close Rolls, 1254-1256
(1931): 277]. In the other record, the king specifically states that
he has pardoned Hugh de Neville the debts of his father, which action
was done at the "instance of Henry de la Mare." [Reference: Excerpta e
Rotuilis Finium, 2 (1836): 228]. These are typical actions of a
brother-in-law in this time period.

The evidence of Joan de la Mare's identity is based on many records
which, taken as a whole, show a pattern of close association between
her and the Neville family over many years. In other posts, I've
shown that Joan was granted land in Somerset by her step-father, Sir
John de Gatesden. I've also shown that Joan's 2nd husband, Sir Walter
de la Hyde, witnessed documents for both Sir John de Gatesden and for
Joan's mother, Hawise de Neville. I've also shown that at least one
property, Waldron, Sussex, passed from Sir John and Hawise de Gatesden
to Joan's husband, Walter de la Hyde. In 1277, I find that Walter de
la Hyde and two other men were said to have taken two does belonging
to Hawise de Neville (then deceased). These animals were granted to
Hawise de Neville back in 1264 [References: Calendar of Close Rolls,
1264-1268 (1937): 8; Calendar of Close Rolls, 1272-1279 (1900): 378].
The king ordered that the justices not "disquiet or aggrieve" Walter
de la Hyde regarding the deer, although he provides no explanation for
his order. If Walter de la Hyde was the son-in-law of Hawise de
Neville, it would explain why the king allowed Walter to retain the
deer. Besides Joan de la Mare's continued association with the
Neville family, I've elsewhere shown that her two daughters were
involved on more than one occasion with Joan's half-sister, Margaret
de Gatesden. In one case, Joan's daughters sued Margaret for a manor
in Somerset; in the other case, Joan's younger daughter, Hawise,
conveyed a manor in Sussex to Margaret.

However, there is even more telltale evidence of Joan de la Mare's
identity. Sometime between 1265 and 1269, an alleged miracle took
place in Sussex, which was accredited to the late Simon de Montfort,
Earl of Leicester. The witnesses to the miracle were listed as "Lady
Joan de la Mare" and "Lady Hawise de Neville," both of whom are styled
noblewoman [nobiles mulieres] [Reference: James O. Halliwell, ed., The
Chronicloe of William de Rishanger of the Barons' Wars. The Miracles
of Simon de Montfort) (Camden Soc. 15) (1840): 90, 101-102]. That
Joan de la Mare is accorded the same status as Hawise (de Courtenay)
de Neville is significant, all of the more so because Joan is listed
first before Hawise in the list of witnesses. If Joan and Hawise were
daughter and mother, it would explain Joan being listed first and why
Joan was styled "noblewoman." Hawise was surely considered to be of
noble birth, she being a descendant of both King Henry I of England
and Isabel de Vermandois.

In my next and final post, I plan to chart the various relationships
between the parties discussed above and show how Joan de la Mare's
great-grandson, Bishop Simon de Montagu, was kinsman to King Edward II
of England.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

E-mail:

Website: www.royalancestry.net

This thread: