GEN-MEDIEVAL-L ArchivesArchiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2004-11 > 1100748996
From: (Douglas Richardson)
Subject: Re: C.P. Addition: Joan, mother of Maud de la Mare, wife of Peter de Montfort
Date: 17 Nov 2004 19:36:36 -0800
Dear Chris ~
Thanks so much for posting this vital new material regarding the
parentage of Maud de la Mare, wife of Sir Peter de Montfort. Much
appreciated! I know the large number of newsgroup members who descend
from this couple will be quite happy to see this information.
Yes, it is certainly puzzling, if not bizarre, that Complete Peerage
would prefer a document two centuries after the fact to a contemporary
document recorded during the lifetime of the individuals in question.
When I first started working on this problem, I found the published
sources varied so considerably that it was impossible to determine who
was right and who was wrong. I even found one published pedigree
which called Peter de Montfort's wife Maud de la Warre! I won't even
mention the websites I searched!
I have no doubt but that more records exist which concern the de la
Mare and allied families which will shed additional light on this
matter. Hopefully newsgroup members will start searching through what
records are available to them and post their findings. Collegiality
is the key to solving many of these longstanding genealogical
Thanks again, Chris!
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
"Chris Phillips" <> wrote in message news:<email@example.com>...
> Douglas Richardson wrote:
> Complete Peerage, 9 (1936): 127 (sub Montfort) has a good account of
> the life history of Sir Peter de Montfort (died 1287), of Beaudesert,
> Warwickshire. Regarding Sir Peter's marriage, Complete Peerage says
> the following:
> "He married circa 1260 Maud, daughter and heiress of Matthew, son of
> Henry de la Mare, with whom he has Ashtead in Surrey."
> The source cited for the marriage of Peter and Maud is V.C.H. Surrey,
> 3 (1911): 248. V.C.H. Surrey in turn gives two sources for the
> marriage, one which identifies Maud as the daughter of Henry de la
> Mare, and the other which identifies Maud as the daughter of Matthew
> son of Henry de la Mare.
> I was curious about this contradiction, so I had a look at the VCH volume
> today. The text describes Matilda as "daughter or granddaughter" of Henry de
> Mara, dead by 1260, and in a footnote cites three records:
> (1) Coram Rege R. 11, m. 14d; Abbrev. Plac. (Rec. Com.) 152. Apparently both
> these describe her as Henry's daughter. The second, from late 1260,
> certainly does. (See text below; this is the origin of the VCH statement,
> already posted by Doug, that Walter de la Hyde and Joan his wife held a
> moiety of Ashtead by virtue of the wardship of Matilda. In the record,
> Matilda is identified as daughter and heir of Henry.) If I interpret the
> reference correctly, the first is equivalent to the modern reference KB
> 27/11, covering the period Michaelmas 2/3 Edward I to Hillary 3 Edward I
> (2) A pedigree in De Banco R. 926, m. 427, cited both for the marriage of
> Peter and Matilda, and for her being the daughter of Matthew son of Henry. I
> believe this equates to the modern reference CP 40/926, which remarkably
> enough is a plea roll from Michaelmas 9 Henry VII . If I've got that
> right it means that in this instance CP has, bizarrely, preferred the
> evidence of a pedigree recorded more than two centuries after the event, to
> two contemporary records placing Maud as the daughter of Henry.
> This is further confirmed by the entry from the Close Rolls already posted
> by Doug, dated 7 May 1265.
> Chris Phillips
> Walt'us de la Hyde & Joh'a uxor ejus optul' se v'sus Petrum de Monte Forti &
> alios de placita quare vi & armis venerunt ad man'ium de Asted & p'd'cos
> Walt'um & Joh'am de medietate p'd'ci man'ii in custodia sua existente
> racione custodie Matild' fil' & hered' Henr' de la Ware ejecerunt Et ip'i
> non veniunt Ideo p'cept' fuit vic' q'd distingat eos, &c
> [Placitorum ... Abbreviatio, p. 152 (Record Commission);
> rot' 14 in dorso; Placita coram D'no Rege a die Sc'i Mich'is Anno xliv
> incipiente xlv [Henry III]
> Note in pen indicates Curia Regis 168 = Modern reference KB 26/168]
|Re: C.P. Addition: Joan, mother of Maud de la Mare, wife of Peter de Montfort by (Douglas Richardson)|