Cecil George Savile Foljambe Liverpool.

The house of Cornewall online

. (page 16 of 33)
Online LibraryCecil George Savile Foljambe LiverpoolThe house of Cornewall → online text (page 16 of 33)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

same Osbern hunts, and from whence he has what he can catch. Nothing else."
Later on these forest lands were disafforested and brought into cultivation.
A Statute of Edward I. enacted this for the safety of the King's lieges. Quod
tuto transeantur ubi robberice (sic.) fieri solebant.

Nash in his valuable " History of Worcestershire," vol. i., p. 239, gives
the following statement :

"At the time of the Conquest Osbern Fitz Richard held Clifton on
Teme. He was son of Richard Scrape, a Saxon,* who in the time of
Edward the Confessor possessed great estates in these parts, and whose chief
residence was at Richard's Castle, County Hereford, which he is supposed to
have built and given name to. In all which property he was succeeded by his
son Osbern, who found such favour with the Conqueror that he not only
retained all his paternal possessions, but had great add tions to them — which
furnishes a curious proof in support of the author of argumentum anii-Nor-
manicum (in opposition to Dr. Brady and other writers) that the entrance of
WilUam I. into the Kingdom was more by compact with the people than by
conquest ; and that several of the principal Saxons retained their estates and
assisted in supporting him on the throne. We can hardly imagine it re-
quired such authentic evidence as this parish — Clifton — affords to support it ;

* Nash here evidently regards Srrob, or Scrupe, or Scrope, as a name not in character
Norman. Mr. Bannister (History of Ewyas Harold) holds the opposite view. It seems not impro-
bable that Scrob's son may have been one of those Courtiers who were in the train of the Confessor
during his earUer years in France, and thus have become Normanised.



as it is extremely improbable that so powerful a people as the Saxons would
have suffered themselves to be held in subjection to the small force the
Conqueror could bring here, if the consequence was to have been the total
deprivation of their property."

The Houses of Scrob or Scrope and De Say being historical it may be
helpful to the reader if we state their descent in the form of a key pedigree, thus :

Richard, son of Scrob, of Richard's Castle.*^
(one of Edward the Confessor's Normans).

OsBERN, FiTz- Richard, living Temp.^
William I.

PicoTus DE Say, of Stokesay Castle=
Arms : Gu. 2 bars vair. |

Theodoric de Say=

Elias, als. Helyas de Say=Egelina.


Hugh Fitzosbern.— Eustatia de Say.


OsBERN or Osbert de Say = Amicia.

(took his mother's name), daughter of (took his mother's

s.p. Walter De name).

Lord of Richard's Castle. Clifford. Lord of Richard's

Castle. Arms of Say

impaUng Chfford— Chequy

or and az. a Bende Gu.

Hugh de Say = Lucy, daughter of Walter
■ De Chfford, son of

Richard, son of Ponce.
She was sister of Fair
Rosamond, and re-mar-
ried Bartholomew De

Richard de Say.

Hugh de SAY=>LiBEL Marmyon,
ob. circa 1195. | who died before 1215.

I r (I) I (2) (3)

Helyas, Robert, Hugh de Ferrars=Margaeet=Robert de Mortimer, = William de

— AviciA s.p. I jure uxoris Baron Stutteville of

s.p. by Tenure. Died before Cottmgham, York.

I Nov. 24, 1219. married prior to 1219,

i died circa 1258.

Hugh de Mortimer, Lord of Richard's Castle= . . .
and of Burford, Baron by Tenure, I

died Nov., 1272. ^|

Robert de Mortimer,=Joyce, d. and heiress of William la Zouche of Ashby, Leicester,
aged 22 in 1274. I died prior to 1289.
Died circa 1287.
Baron by Tenure. |

Hugh de Mortimer, Baron =
Mortimer of Richard's Castle

(by writ of Summons,
26 Jany., 1296-7 : who, how-
ever, it not being a regular
Summons to Parliament, was
Summoned 6 Feb., 129S-9,
and 10 April, 1299). t)ied
prior to Aug. 12, 1304. Arms,

Barry of six or and vert,

16 fleurs de lys, 3. 3. 3. 3. 3. i.



Isabella. |
Matilda William la Zouche de Mortimer= Alice de ToNit
or Maude, Baron Zouche of Mortimer ] of Hamstead,

married (3rd husband), sister and heir of

circa 1290. ob. Feb. 25, 1337. ' Robert Baron

(Query Scrope?) l_^ de Toni.



Alan, 2nd Baron,
died March 25, 1319.

Joyce=John Botetort

• It may be noted that Nash omits Helyas, son of Theodoric de Say, and Vincent not only
omitted Eustatia de Say, but further also ignored Scrope, Osbern Fitz Richard, and Hugh Fitz

t Her first husband was Thomas de Layboume ; her second Guy de Beauchamp, Earl of
Warwick, who died August 12th, 1315, having had by her a son, Thomas de Beauchamp, Earl of
Warwick, born circa 131 4.



(i) I (2)

Sir Thomas de Bykexore=Joan de Mortimer=5ik Richard Talbot.*
s.p. (first co-heiress). died prior to 1337,

(Married 1315-16.) /Et, 12 in 1304. jure usoris of Richiard's

Sir Geoffre / Cornewall = Margaret = William

jure uxoris Earon of i de Mortimer D'Evereux.
Burford. Died prior to 1337. I (2nd co-heiress.)

The Herefordshire Scropes, assuming their identity with Scrob, merged
their patronymic eventually in that of De Say of Stokesay Castle, but Scropes
appear later on elsewhere. Thus in the third year of King John, William de
Stateville, or Stuteville, and Philip Escrope were Sheriffs of Westmoreland.
The latter left two daughters, married respectively to Willardley and de Staxton.
Sir Nicholas Middleton, in the cause ceU'bre of Scrope v. Grosvenor, deposed,
that the Scrope arms, viz., azure a bende d'or, were in old glass windows and
painted on the walls of many Abbeys, Churches, and Chapels in the County
of York and Richmond, and at Appleby, Carlisle, and Bolton. That trial
in the Court of Chivalry before the High Constable and Earl Marshal of Eng-
land, took place in 1385-90, the parties being Lord Scrope of Bolton and Sir

* The issue of Sir Richard Talbot by Joan de Mortimer %va5 Sir John Talbot of Richard's
Castle, who married Juliana, or Joan, daughter of Lord Grey, and by her had (i) John Talbot,
who by Catherine had, with Richard, Thomas, John, and Richard (2), all s.p., three co-heiresses,
viz., Philippa. who married Sir Matthew Goumay, but died s.p., as also her sister Eleanor. The
eldest sister Elizabeth, %vho died in 1407, married Sir Warine Arcedechne of Lanheme, who died
1401, and by him had (i) Alianora, cet 24, 1407. She married Walter de Lacy, who did homage
for his wife's lands, 4 Hen.VI. (2) Philippa, izt 23 in 1407. She married Hugh Courtenay : and
(3) Margery, tst 16 in 1407, who married Sir Thomas Arundel, second son of Sir John Arundel,
(variously described as of Loweme, Lanheme, and Lanhadron) by Annora, daughter and co-heiress
of Sir WiUiam Lamboume and Johanna, his wife.co-heiress of John Lansladron and .Amicia. The
Barony of Mortimer of Richard's Castle is still in abeyance between the descendants of Joan Talbot
and Margaret de Mortimer wife of Sir Geoffrey Cornewall. (2) The brother of John Talbot, i.e.,
son of Sir John Talbot by Joan Grey, was Sir Gilbert Talbot, who by Margaret, daughter of
Sir John Howard had an only son Richard, who died s.p. in 1399. Thus the senior heirs of the
Barony of Mortimer of Richard's Castle are the descendants of Sir Warine Arcedechne and Elizabeth

Trom Robinson's Castles we extract the following : —

Joan De Mortimer, the elder coheiress of Hugln De Mortimer (summoned in 1297 in con-
sequence of his services in the war in Scotland as Lord Mortimer of Richard's Castle), married
first Thomas De Bicknor, and afterwards Sir Richard Talbot, said to ha\e been a member of the
Eccleswall line. By him she had an heir, Sii John Talbot, " of whom," says Blount, " and of his
wife, Juliana, I have seen a deed in French dated 23, Edward IIL, wlierein he writes himself
Seigneuer De Chastel Richart, and it has a curious seal of arms. This Sir John had issue another
Sir John, as appears by this Record. " Johannes Talbot, miles fil. et hosres J oh. Talbot de CasteUo
Ricardi, militi't, et Julianee uxoris suce, tenet manerium Blatvagh et 1') S. redditum in Lentwardyn in
Com. Salop De Rege in capite per servitium medicetatis Baronioe de Burford quondum Roberti de
Mortimer." This last Sir John Talbot died without male issue (in 1375), and by his female issue
the inheritance was divided between Sir Gwarin Archdeacon (sic) and Sir Mathew Goumey.

Ibid. John, son and heir of John Talbot, was 21 years of age on the Feast of the Invention
of Holy Cross, was bom at Richard's Castle, and baptized on the aforesaid day and Feast, a.d.

Ibid. The connection of these Mortimers (of Richard's Castle) with those of Wigmore is
very obscure. Blount says he had seen a deed dated 1289, bearing the arms of the former, viz..
Gules and Crosslets or between 2 bars wavy, which without the Crosslets were the arms of Saye.


Robert Grosvenor. It commenced at Newcastle on Tjme, and after five years
litigation judgment was pronounced by the King in favour of Lord Scrope.
One of the principal witnesses was William, Prior of Lanercost, who stated that
in the West window of his Church were the Scrope arms within a bordure or,
as also in the refectory, occup3dng the chief place of honour between those of
the Founders Multon and Vaux. Further that these arms were on banners
used at funerals with those of other nobles, in an old Chapel at Kirkoswald
and on the morsus of one of their copes at Lanercost, with a white label for
difference. The Prior afl&rmed also that the tradition of his Priory — founded
in the reign of Henry IL — identified the said coat — azure, a bende d'or — with
the family of Scrope, who were cousins to one Gant, who came over with William
the Conqueror. This evidence of the Prior was confirmed by Lord Dacre, and
tells in favour of the Norman origin of the Scropes. It may be added that
Kirkoswald, mentioned by the Prior, was the Cathedral demesne of the de
Stutevilles, of whom — vide supra — William was the third husband of Margaret
de Say, i.e., after the decease of Robert de Mortimer, her second husband. It
has further been conjectured that Matilda, the unnamed wife of Sir Hugh
Mortimer, was a Scrope. If that be so, the fact of the Scrope arms being in
Lanercost Priory can be accounted for.*

Among the muniments of Sir Thomas Cornewall, Baron of Burford, 1623,
which he exhibited to Vincent, who duly noted their contents, the earliest
apparently is an undated grant by Hugo de Say to one Roger AngUcus (Eng-
lishe) in fee of the land of Rokehull, " Quam Osbertus filius Hugonis patruus
{i.e., uncle on the father's side) ei dedii." The word " patruus " marks the
descent clearly.

Another of the deeds of Sir Thomas, dated 1215 A.D., 17 John, bears this
description : " 30 July. Margareia de Say atturnavit coram Domino Rege loco
siio Robertnm de Mortuo Mari, virum suum ad lucrandum et perdendum in loquela
quce est inter ipsum et Gilbertum de Say de placito terroe et heredUatis suae. Dat.
Apud Brug. M. 18 dorso. Patent." It does not appear who Gilbert de Say
was. Probably a brother not named in the pedigree, or possibly a cousin.

In the same year, on AprU 30, a summons was issued to Hugh de Mortimer
to be at Cjn-ene (Cirencester) with horses and men. And again in 1215, Claus.

* Another link between Cornewall and Scope occurs in the 17th Century through the families
of Reade and Harford, the latter descending from the Scropes of Castlecombe, Wilts.


pt. 2, M. 15, " Mandatum est Vice-Comiti, Sussex quod habere facial Robio. de
Mortiio Mari terram cum pert : in — , quce fuit Mabilioe de Say matris uxoris
ipsitis Roberti. Dal. Apud. Roffam. 3 Dec. 1215."

Among the Archives of George, Lord Carew of Clopton, the following
deed was discovered by Vincent in 1621 :

No date. "Omnibus hoc scriptum visuris vel audituris Hugo de Mortuo
Mari salutem. Noveritis me concessisse, etc. Richd. de Moimson totam illam
terram de Crawfield, quam pater suus, Ricardus tsnuit de feoffamento Roberti de
Mortuo Mari, patris mei et MargaretcB de Say, matris mece. Hanc partem Sigilli
met impressione confirmavi. Seal. Barry of 16 fletirs de lys. Legend, Sigillum
Roberti de Mortuo Mari.

This confirms the descent as given.

Further, among the Archives of Sir Thomas CornewaU we find the follow-
ing under date 17th John, 1216 A.D. :

Claus. p. 2, 51. 3. " Rex Vice Comiti, Oxon. Precipimus tibi quod inquiri
facias Si Hugo de Say, pater Margaretce, uxoris Roberti de Morttio Mari,* dedit
in escambium Thomce de Arden Manerium de Suthera, etc. Teste, etc., apud.
Redyng, 13 April, 1216.

This affords additional confirmation.

By 1219 Robert de Mortimer had passed away, and we find in Sir Thomas
Cornewall's Archives two entries relating to the third marriage of Margaret
de Say. Thus : 4 Hen. III., Patent part i., M. 7. " Rex militibus et libere
tenentibus et aliis de omnibus terris quce hereditarie contingunt Margaretce, quce
fuit uxor Roberti de Mortuo Mari, salutem. Sciatis quod dilectus et fidelis
noster Willus. de Stuteville de assensu et voluntate nostra et consilii nostri duxit
in uxorem Margaretum predictam, idea vobis mandamus, etc." Dat., April,
Hereford, 24 Nov. (1219)."

* The foUowing undated entries are from Sir Thomas Cornewall's muniments, 1623 A.D.

Robert de Mortimer, Lord of Richard's Castle, grants to Hugh de Mortimer, his brother,
a messuage and half a virgate of land in Burford. Seal. 2 bars vair. Legend, Sigillum Roberti
de Mortuo Mari.

Hugo de Mortimer, Lord of Richard's Castle, grants and confirms to each of his free burgesses
of Burford all their burgages, rendering for each burgage 12 pence per annmn. Hugh de Mortimer,
Lord of Richard's Castle, grants to Hugh DuneU, etc. Sead. Barry of six, 16 fleurs de lys, 3. 3.
3. 3. 3. I. Legend, Sigillum Hugoiiis Mortimer.

We have also from the Cotton MSS. (Jul. C. VII., 118) evidence of the importance of the
Lordship of Richard's Castle, e.g., Robertas de Mortuo Mari tenet feoda 23 in honors Castelli Ricardi
cum filia Hugonis de Say, hceredis Osberti filii Hugonis.


The royal benevolence none the less exacted a modest return in kind,
e.g., A.D. 1219, 4 Hen. III., " Willus. de Stuteville finem fecit cum Domino Rege
per duos palfredos pro habenda in uxorem Margaretam quce fuit uxor Roherti
de Mortuo Marie cum omnibus terris et tenementis quae ad ipsam Margaretam
hereditarie contingent. Teste, 23 Nov."

As regards Robert de Mortimer, the following, undated, occurs in the
Testa, de Nevill — " Robertus de Mortuo Mari tenet in Com. Hereford de Baronia
Casfri Ricardi feodum unius militis et dimidium de hcereditate uxoris suae."

We now come to Hugh de Mortimer, who died Nov. 1272. Here Sir Thomas
Cornewall's muniments are instructive, e.g., 1258 A.D., 43 Hen. III., " Hugo
de Mortuo Mari solvit 200 marks de relevio suo de terris qucB Willus. Stuteville
tenuit per legem Anglics de hcereditate Margarice de Say, mafris ipsius Hugonis."

And 1266, 51 Hen. III., a grant was made to him of a weekly market at

The following escheats further confirm the pedigree :

A.D. 1273. Anno 2 Ed. I. No. 58, Salop. " Extenta feodorum militiim
quce fuerunt Roberti de Mortuo Mari defuncti, qui de Rege tenuit in capite, etc."

A.D. 1274. 3 Ed. I. No. 42, Wigorn. Monday next after the Feast of
St. Thomas Apostle. " Inquisitio post mortem Hugonis de Mortuo Mari. Dicunt
quod Robertus de Mortuo Mari est filius ejus, et ejus proximus hceres et est de
cBtat : 22 et amplins."

A.D. 1274. 3 Ed. I. No. 4, Hereford. Similar Inquisition, Friday in
crastino Sanctce Lucice Virginis.

A.D. 1274. 3 Ed. I. No. 42, Co. Salop. Similar Inquisition, Saturday
after the Feast of St. Lucy Virgin.

Thus as regards Hugh de Mortimer. As concerning his son and successor
at Richard's Castle and Burford, a document among Sir Thomas Cornewall's
muniments shows, that in 1276 he acknowledged in person service of three
Knight's fees in Burford, while another document gives evidence of his being
ahve in 1281. He died prior to 1286, inasmuch as in that year, 15 Ed. I., we
find (Claus. M. 6) a mandate to the Escheator citra Trentum to deliver the
Manors of Coderigg, Co. Vigorn and Burford, Co. Salop, which were of Robert
de Mortimer deceased, to Joyce, who was wife of the said Robert.


Again, A.D. 1287, 15 Ed. I., 18 July. The King finds by Inquisition that
the Manors of Farnleigh, Hokigg, King's Newton,* and Huntsbarre, which
Robert de Mortimer lately deceased held, were of the inheritance of Joyce his
wife — ^liberate. Teste. Edmundo Com. Cornub. Consanguin. Regis. But by
another writ of the same date these Manors were to be delivered to Joyce to
hold in dower.

Further, Escheat 18 Ed. I., A.D. 1289. " Joyce [Jocosa] who was wife
of Robert de Mortimer, enfeoffed Isabella, daughter of the said Robert, of the
Manor of Huntbere, etc. Said Joyce is now dead. No. 42, Devon."

Escheat 24 Ed. I., 10 Dec, A.D. 1295, Claus. M. 12. Hugh, son and heir
of Robert de Mortimer and Joyce his wife, is of full age. And Escheat 26,
Ed. I., A.D. 1298, " License from the King to Hugo de Mortimer to grant
certain Manors to the Bishop of Bath and Wells, to be regranted to the said
Hugh and Matilda his wife." The Bishop of Bath and Wells was WiUiam de

Hugh de Mortimer, like his sire, was short-lived. A.D. 1304, 32 Ed. I.,
No. 48. " Inquisitio post mortem Hugonis de Mortiio Man — Wednesday ne.xt
after the decollation of St. John the Baptist, Aug. 29 — finds that Johanna
eldest and Margaret second daughter of the said Hugh were his co-heirs, that
Joan was of the age of 12 years on the Feast of St. Catherine, the Virgin, last
past (Nov. 25, 1303), and Margaret of the age of eight years on the Feast of the
Exaltation of the Cross last past [14 Sept., 1303]. Said Hugh held Burford of
the King in Capite per Baroniam."

These last words open a question. Do they imply that Hugh de Mortimer
held Burford as a Barony by tenure, he holding service therein of 3 Knights'
fees ; or are we to interpret " per Baroniam " as referring to his Barony by
writ of Mortimer of Richard's Castle ? The latter view requires further proof
than is supplied by the words themselves, inasmuch as beyond a doubt the
Cornewalls, so long as they remained in possession of the Manor of Burford,
claimed to be Barons by tenure, and apparently in virtue of the terms of this
Inquisition. It seems desirable to insist on this, inasmuch as a writer in the
Genealogical Magazine affirmed that there never was a Barony of Burford.
The question is a large one, involving as it does the existence of Baronies by

* Or Nymington or Nympton. It is spelt thus indifferently


But as regards the Barony of Burford, Levien supplies convincing evidence
of its recognised status. Without endorsing his affirmation that Burford was
the " Caput " of Richard the son of Scrob's Barony, we may cite the following
as applying to the Barony at a later period : " Under Hen. III. Burford seems
to have become a place of some importance, for in the 51st of his reign (1266)
a Charter, dated at Kenilworth, i6th Nov., grants to Hugh Mortimer a weekly
market on Saturdays, and an annual fair of 3 days on the 4th, 25th, and 26th
of March. Various privileges were also ceded to him, such as hberty to hunt in
the Royal Forests in Herefordshire, Worcestershire, Staffordshire, and Salop,
in acknowledgment, no doubt, of the assistance he had afforded to Henry in
his operations against Llewellyn, Prince of Wales, and his personal valour at
the battles of Lewes and Evesham. After his death the King's writ of Diem
clausit extremum is issued, and an Inquisition as to the state of the Hundred
of Overs was held at Shrewsbury. The Jurors then spoke of the Barony and
Manor of Burford being in the hands of the King, or in that of his Escheator, till
the heir should have been fined for his livery. They also said that the late Hugh
Mortimer had procured Burford to be made a free Borough by Hen. III., after
the battle of Evesham, but that no farm (or tax) was to be paid to the Crown
on that account. And they found also, that since the said battle " The Baron
of Burford " had appropriated a right of free warren in Burford ; but, as they
added, the jurors knew not by what warrant." This verdict of the Shrewsbury
jurors would seem to throw a vivid light on the words per Baroniam.

Again, Baker — History of Northants — says " Burford was a land barony
by tenure of providing five men for the army of Wales ; and though the Corne-
walls were not Parliamentary Peers, either by writ of summons or patent, yet
they invariably styled themselves Barons of Burford, and retained this titular
distinction even down to the alienation of the estate in the early part of
the iSth Century."

Further, Camden — Magna Brittannia — " The Barony of Burford came
to the Cornewalls through Margaret, daughter of Hugh de Mortimer, who
married Jeffrey de Cornewall or Cornwaile, a descendant from Richard Earl of
Cornwall, King of the Almains, a younger son of King John, whose heirs, even
to our time (viz., 1607) have borne the honourable title of Barons, but were
not such Barons as might sit in ParUament."

A.D. 1307-S. Escheat i Ed. II. No. 59, Hereford. " Inquisition of
lands, which Matilda, who was wife of Hugh de Mortimer of Richard's Castle,


held in Dower on the day of her death — of the inheritance of the heirs of the
said Hugh, they being under age."

On the same date similar Inquisitions were held in Salop and in Vigorn.

A.D. 1307-8. I Ed. II. " Extenta feodorum tnilittim quce fueriint Hugonis
de Mortno Mart defuncti die quae obiit, et quce, raiione minoris cetatis hceredum
ipsius Hugonis, in manu Regis exisiunt."

A.D. 1307-8. I Ed. II. M. 3. " The King assigns to Joan, eldest
daughter and co-heir of Hugh de Mortimer of Bishop's Castle, and to Thomas
de Bykenore, her husband, Margaret, the second and other co-heir, being under
age, a moiety of the Manor of Boreford, etc."

A.D. 1309. 2 Ed. II. 65, Vigorn. " Inquisitio post mortem Willelmi de
Mortuo Man, taken Sunday before Epiphany, William de Mortimer* held 30
acres of arable of the gift of Robert de Mortimer for hfe of the inheritance of
the heirs of Hugh — that such heirs are also heirs of the said William, and are,
Joan, wife of Thomas de Bicknor, who is of the age of 17 years, and Margaret,
wife of Galfridus de Cornewall, of the age of 14 years, and said William held
on the day of his death, a messuage of Isabella de Mortimer."

A.D. 1309. Escheat, 2 Ed. II. No. 65, Salop. Similar Inquisition taken
Monday next after the Feast of St. Nicholas. " Joan was of the age of 18
years on the Feast of St. Lawrence, and Margaret is under age and in the
custody of the King."

These two last entries appear, so far as Margaret is concerned, to be self-
contradictory. As will be shown in the next chapter, Sir Geoffrey de Cornewall
had been granted the custody of the lady who became at so early an age his
wife, and we may assume that the Inq. p. m. of WUham de Mortimer was
taken at a later month ia 1309 than that concerning the co-hekesses of Sir
Hugh de Mortimer.

A.D. 1325-6. 19 Ed. II. " Licence to Isabella de Mortimer to grant
certain Manors, etc., to Richard Talbot of Richard's Castle and Joan his wife
for Ufe. Remainder to John, son of said Richard and Joan. Remainder to
Joan in fee."

* A.D. 1298. 26 Ed. I. Ceeilia (U petit versus Hawisian qua juit uxor Willelmi

de Mortuo Mari terras tn Dunliutierly.


A.D. 1330. 4 Ed. III. Claus. M. 40 dorso. " John, de Wotten and
another grant to the Lady Joan, who was wife of the Lord Richard Thalebot,
the manor of Richard's Castle for her life. Remainder to John, son of said
Joan, and to Juliana, his wife, in special tail. Remainder to John in tail
general. Remainder to Richard, brother of Jolm, in tail. Remainder to
Thomas, brother of Richard, in tail. Remainder to Richard, the younger
brother of Thomas, in tail. Remainder to said Joan, who was wife of Richard
Thalebot, in fee. Dated Thursday after St. Valentine the Mart}^:. 6th
February, 1330.

A.D. 1332. Brevia Regis. No. 13. " Whereas Hugh de Mortimer of
Richard's Castle, 19 March, 27 Edward, formerly King of England, our grand-
father (1299) acknowledged to owe William de Paston 52 marcs sLx shillings
and 8 pence Scire facias to Geoffrey de CornewaU and Margaret, his wife as
heir of Hugh — They come and say that Joan, who was wife of Richard Talbot,
is one of the co-heiresses of Hugh. Teste Meipso apiid Newbury, 6 Nov. in
the 5th year of our reign."

Online LibraryCecil George Savile Foljambe LiverpoolThe house of Cornewall → online text (page 16 of 33)